“Sex without contact”

Share:

Cyber Adultery in the 21st Century

Exclusive by Raïssa Robles

CAUTION NSFW: Sexually explicit discussion in this post. Reader’s discretion and/or parental guidance are advised.

A new commenter named “RM” wrote several posts today saying “there is no such crime as cyber adultery.”

The commenter argued:

can there be adultery without sexual intercourse? no. how about through skype? is that possible? again we refer to the definition of sexual intercourse as defined under our jurisprudence and not on any source found in the internet. it must be one where the male’s penis must have contact with the female’s vagina. so can we do it through skype? of course not. so what now? can we still commit adultery through the use of information and communications technology? of course not.

As an example of how cyber adultery could take place, RM — who is clearly not going to become famous for delicacy of speech (or perhaps he plans to start a career writing porn novels because he’s not doing too well as a lawyer, assuming he is one) wrote:

say A and B are married. B the wife went to the house of her neighbor C, a man. both engaged in sexual intercourse in the past without the knowledge of A the legal husband. now say for instance C, the man took out his iphone 5 and inserted it in the vagina of B then had the vibration turned on and the latter was shaking and screaming at the top of her lungs saying deeper! deeper! A the husband heard it and recognized her wife’s voice. so he went to the apartment of C to see for himself what was happening and boom. they were caught in the act of doing the deed. so A decided to file a criminal action. Question: what crime may B and C be held liable for, if any? the answer is of course is adultery. not cyber adultery but adultery. the fact that C inserted his iphone inside the vagina of B does not make the cybercrime law applicable because carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act (of) a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.

In one of my replies to RM, I said:

You are looking at the law from the prism of today and yesterday.

I am looking at the law from what could happen in the future when the definition of “adultery” or “sexual intercourse” could change.

Recall that the definition of rape changed dramatically in our law. Penetration is no longer required to establish rape.

I also said:

You are going by the current legal definition of the word “sexual intercourse”. What if this definition changes due to technology?

I was going to drop this matter and move on to another topic until I read RM’s next comment where he, in effect, said I should first study more to be worthy of arguing with him because I am not a lawyer with four years of law studies. RM said:

the things i am talking about is not subject to a debate unless you are a lawyer, a law student, or a person who has devoted his whole life studying our judicial system in the Philippines. these things are very technical which cannot just be understood by reading blogs and news and opinion of others. you have to read our revised penal code. you have to read our family code. you have to read our constitution. you have to read the rules on civil procedure as well as criminal procedure and also the rules on evidence particularly the admissibility of evidence there are a bunch of requisites in order for an evidence to be admissible. you have to know what an object evidence is. what a documentary and testimonial evidence refer to. the best evidence rule the parol evidence rule the spousal immunity or the marital disqualification rule and distinguish it from marital privileged communication and from parental and filial privilege which you also have to connect in the provision under the Family Code particularly art. 215 regarding when the testimony of the witness is considered indispensable in a crime as an exception to the general rule and what crimes covered and committed by whom. this is why the study of law takes four years. it is not like we see a law we read it and then we understand it already no. we should not assume too much that we know about it especially if that is not our field of specialization.

RM is right. I have not devoted four years of study in law. I am only a perpetual law student and an informal one at that.

RM is also resorting to what American biologist-blogger PZ Myers called the “Courtier’s Reply”. You can read about it by clicking on this link.

However, while some people condescendingly tell others not to dabble in law when they are not lawyers, perhaps some alleged lawyers should not claim to know about technology when in reality they know nothing about it. And they think pomposity and pedantry are a substitute for wisdom.

Now let me get back to the issue on hand.

RM illustrated adultery in this manner:

  • C, the man took out his iphone 5 and inserted it in the vagina of B then had the vibration turned on and the latter was shaking and screaming at the top of her lungs saying deeper! deeper!
  • A the husband heard it and recognized her (sic) wife’s voice.
  • so he went to the apartment of C to see for himself what was happening and boom. they were caught in the act of doing the deed.

Then RM gave a mini-lecture on the definition of “carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse”:

In this example, the penetration was accomplished with the use of an iPhone, because as “RM” explained “carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act (of) a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.”

Before I go into cyber adultery, I must say I am intrigued by RM’s idea of what constitutes  sexual intercourse.

RM, if the married woman tells the court she was only having oral sex in bed with her lover, does that let her off the hook because that’s not adultery as you define it? Or if the man only wanted an unmentionable object (let’s euphemistically refer to it as an “RM”) inserted inside his  anus by his married woman-lover, that isn’t adultery, too?

But I want to thank you, RM. This definition of sexual intercourse you gave as – “the act of a person inserting…any other object in the vagina of a woman” – makes cyber adultery possible.

There is a technological device about to be sold in Taiwan this month that could make cyber adultery through “long distance sex” possible – or sex via bluetooth.

Remember what RM said:

carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act of a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.

For starters, what if this bluetooth device that I’m speaking of – which the distant lover guides via the Internet – is used by a married woman?

What if the spouse catches the married woman in the act, while online with her lover?

Of course this scenario is not in the Revised Penal Code which was drawn up half a century before the Internet and social media platforms were invented. However, if Section 6 – which crammed the entire Revised Penal Code containing the crime of adultery – is allowed to remain in the Cybercrime Prevention Act, this could be used in the future against cyber lovers.

As I said, I would have no problem with adultery being in the Cybercrime Law provided it punishes both married men and women equally and not just women. Because the Internet will provide men with more ways to cheat on their wives without legal sanctions.

As my husband Alan – who pointed out the existence of this Internet-enabled device – reminded me. Today, this is what’s available. You never know what technology will come up with tomorrow.

You can watch a video on the device by clicking on this link. 

Below is a description of the Internet-enabled device from tokyoreporter.com

Call me maybe: Taiwanese smartphone gizmo Love Palz gives couples good gyrations

Devices send data related to movement between a smartphone via a bluetooth connection

Dads spending lonely nights away from home or guys having a hard time meeting their mistresses might enjoy a new cyber-sex aid from Taiwan, reports Shukan Post (Oct. 26).

Love Palz is a machine and app that enables couples separated by long distances to enjoy virtual sex with one another while mutually connected to an iPhone or other smartphone device.

The product, scheduled to be released in January, is comprised of a male and female version, each consisting of a simple design, resembling a sleek thermos bottle. When the cap is removed from the female version (called “Hera”) a smooth phallus is revealed. For “Zeus,” the inside is a cylindrical cavity lined with textured silicone.

The devices send data back and forth between the user’s smartphone via a Bluetooth connection. A speed sensor in Zeus detects the velocity of the male’s piston-like action and sends that data to Hera, which in turn recreates that motion simultaneously. Hera, for her part, senses pressure changes based on the female’s reaction and sends that information to Zeus, whose built-in air pump adjusts tightness appropriately.

The smartphone app allows both users to see the face of their partner during the sessions, which the Web site envisions taking place in the home, office, or great outdoors.

The developer of the device was studying in the United Kingdom when he came up with the idea. “I was lonely during my studies as I couldn’t see my girlfriend back in Taiwan,” says the representative from the company. “That was my inspiration. I want couples engaged in long-distance relationships to enjoy this product’s benefits.”

Each unit is made of a high-quality, aluminum-magnesium alloy, which, according to LovePalz, is “non-toxic, light, durable, and last but not the least, very fashionable.” The company also claims that the device is fully water proof and usable in water.

Of concern to Shukan Post is the quality of the interior silicone. “The male version provides an almost equivalent experience in pleasure to that provided by a Tenga product,” assures the LovePalz representative, referring to Japan’s popular manufacturer of male masturbation aids.

The LovePalz Web site says that while its product was rejected on the Kickstarter fundraising platform more than 3,800 pre-orders have been made. The device is priced at $94.50 for a pair. The company also sells a special 24-carat edition (limited to 10 sets) for $10,000.

This is not the first pleasuring device for use in cyberspace. The Somcon solo-wanker that includes detachable parts suitable for both sexes has been on the market for a few years.

LovePalz admits that Japan is a key market given its advanced sex toys. “We have about 1,000 orders from Japan already,” says the company’s representative.

Soon to be heard in the streets of Shibuya: “Hey, I just met you, and this is crazy, but here’s my number, so…”(A.T.)

Source: “iPhone de konna kota made!? Taiwan kigyo ga kaihatsu, ” Shukan Post (Oct. 26, pages 145-146)

Note: Brief extracts from Japanese vernacular media in the public domain that appear here were translated and summarized under the principle of “fair use.” Every effort has been made to ensure accuracy of the translations. However, we are not responsible for the veracity of their contents. The activities of individuals described herein should not be construed as “typical” behavior of Japanese people nor reflect the intention to portray the country in a negative manner. Our sole aim is to provide examples of various types of reading matter enjoyed by Japanese.

____________________________________

Related Story:

Dear Justice Assistant Secretary Sy: If cyber adultery doesn’t exist, why did you put it in the Cybercrime Law?

 

 

304 Responses to ““Sex without contact””

Read below or add a comment...

  1. 39
    Mafe says:

    While waiting for database error being fixed, I decided to review previous posts and I found this for the first time. This is Raissa’s “sexiest” blog and “funniest”, too. Reading from first to latest post, i was laughing every bit of the way while learning from everyone. Welcome to our new commenters. :)

  2. 38
    begalon says:

    I am unsually conservative who believes that ADULTERY, never mind CYBER ADULTERY is a physical sexual act or contact between married people. Doesnt matter if there is a penetration or not once they are engage in any form of sexual act they are commiting adultery. If Cyber adultery exists, then a sexual fantasy is adulterous.

  3. 37
    baycas says:

    Ang nakaraan…

    http://www.interaksyon.com/infotech/cybercrime/top-ten-questions-by-sc-justices-on-the-cybercrime-law

    Abangan sa ika-22 ng Enero ang ikalawang yugto. Ang SolGen ang itatanghal…

  4. 36
    joedelacruise says:

    Good day, @Baycas.

    Thank you so much for your invitation at No. 29.1. But I have to submit, Your Honor, that I find your checklist to be a bit vague. As an example, if I put “2” in the box for “Chance of being hurt or killed”, would it mean lesser, even, or greater chance of being hurt or killed, and on what grounds/principle?

    And I’m also sorry not to be able to comment on something that is “still-to-be-defined-but-actually-happening cyber adultery”.

    • 36.1
      baycas says:

      Possible consequences in Adulterous Sex WITH Contact:

      Pleasure, check
      Mental problems (e.g., guilt, depression, delusion), check
      Sexually transmitted infections, check
      Marital problems, check
      Lives of children greatly affected, check
      Pregnancy, check
      Chance of being blackmailed, check
      Chance of being ostracized by the community, check
      Chance of being hurt or killed, check

      Possible consequences in Adulterous Sex WITHOUT Contact:

      Pleasure, check
      Mental problems (e.g., guilt, depression, delusion), check
      Sexually transmitted infections, Not applicable
      Marital problems, check
      Lives of children greatly affected, check
      Pregnancy, Not applicable
      Chance of being blackmailed, check
      Chance of being ostracized by the community, check
      Chance of being hurt or killed, check

      • 36.1.1
        baycas says:

        @joedelacruise,

        They are both in existence. The former is already a criminal act. The latter may not pass the standard of being a crime.

        However, their consequences are almost the same.

        Must the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 be made to prevent Case No. 2 or must the State totally/completely ignore the existence of Case No. 2?

      • 36.1.2
        Baltazar says:

        Katoto,

        Pregnancy, Not applicable

        How about a mail-to-order sperm in the future? Probably packed in a dry ice preserved styro , in a pressure-packed Hera-ready cartridge fitted with some sensors to detect the contraction in the female internals which characterizes the Big O. Timed release such that in the middle of the Big O, the contents that has been pre heated already to the body temperature will be spewed out. ;-)

  5. 35
    focusonmayelections says:

    my comment is off topic but i am reading and left about bishops and priests directing their energy at encouraging their flock not to elect candidates who voted for the rh bill.
    the latest is of course the latest tirade from archbishop arguelles. heartwarming however is the fact that influential persons (fr bernas, ernesto pernia of u.p.) as well as ordinary persons (the latest being an the letter to the editor page of inquirer today) are also writing persuasive arguments urging the church officials to desist from what they are doing.

    isn’t it time for our popular cardinal tagle to step in and awaken his priests to the likelihood that the catholic church in the philippines will be abandoned by its educated flock. or is that the motivation behind the anti-rh stand of politicians and church officials- keep them many, keep them poor, keep them uneducated so it will be easier to threaten/manipulate/intimidate them?

    it behooves us to focus our attention on the may elections. electioneering has started. there are so many we need to awaken to the issues raised above.

    • 35.1
      focusonmayelections says:

      correction: first line should red ‘reading right and left about…..”. third line second paragraph should read ” (the latest being one in the letter to the editor page page)”.

      • 35.1.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        THIS COMING ELECTION will be a vote of confidence of the church !!!

        Bantay kayo mga walang hiya na mga pari . We will vote for those who were in favor of RHBill.

        DOWN WITH THE CHURCH !!!! You have oppressed the Filipino minds for a long long time.

    • 35.2
      Parekoy says:

      @f

      Let them do what they perceive/believe is right for the interest of the church, that is their job.

      There is a glimmer of hope that even the poor knows how to count with their fingers and toes. If contraceptives are available/accessible to them, then they instinctively use them.

      Couples basic needs are: food, shelter, and sex.

      Food-the destitute to survive reluctantly became subhuman just to fill their stomachs with ‘Pagapag’.

      Shelter-the homeless actually has plenty of free choices: under the bridge, a makeshift kariton, or even the sidewalks, and many more unoccupied nooks.

      Sex- basically a need and the cheapest form of entertainment, but the consequence is opposite. With contraceptives, the dire consequence is reduced.

      Four hundred years as our provider of unsolicited guidance and wisdom on our reproductive choices has been a failure. Even the uneducated and the maleducated meek has doubts when suffering presently in hell.

      So let the priests, the annointed saviors of our souls, let them, let them, for their influence among the majority of the flock will wane.

  6. 34
    baycas says:

    FIRE!

    I understand sex with or without contact outside the contract (marriage, that is) is like playing with fire.

    “If you play with fire you are likely to get burnt”, they say.

    In relation to RA 10175 (AN ACT DEFINING CYBERCRIME, PROVIDING FOR THE PREVENTION, INVESTIGATION, SUPPRESSION AND THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES)…

    SEC. 6. All crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the use of information and communications technologies shall be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, as the case may be.

    Cyber Arson now exists, well, once AADCPFTPISATIOPTAFOP is already imposable.

    —–
    Note: As I can see that five (5) per cent are already BORED at the time of this posting, I believe “fire” can elicit readers’ attention same as “sex”. Hope this “Fire!” works on those who are bored.

    • 34.1
      Parekoy says:

      @Baycas

      You have the right of free speech, but with some limitations.

      Shouting FIRE inside a Cyber Theater or Cyber Cinema can put you in trouble!

      Most of us here, while watching YouTube movies (I swear, I was not watching that porn… Really!…) panicked, ran out from my house naked, when you shouted FIRE!.

      Luckily, it was false alarm, otherwise I could have saved only a bottle of Jergens and a box of tissues.

      I might sue you… :-)

    • 34.2
      leona says:

      There is this FIRE! the cop shouted and ‘landed’ in a hospital, hand [not burned] ‘shot’ kuno – he’s lying on bed and not on a wheel chair

      “Single shot from 1st SUV

      “When they refused to go down, the soldiers retreated to the line of soldiers and policemen and then a man in civilian clothes leading the group shouted, ‘Fire,’” De Lima said.

      Policemen and soldiers peppered the first vehicle with bullets.

      De Lima said that according to the witnesses, a single shot was fired from inside the first vehicle.

      “The witnesses said they even saw the [spent case fly] out the window from the driver’s side of the first vehicle. “Then it was followed by another order to fire from the same person in civilian clothes at the checkpoint,” she said.

      De Lima said the first burst of gunfire lasted about 20 seconds and the second, about eight seconds.

      Then from the second vehicle, she said, Lontok and another man stepped out, their hands raised.

      But “a uniformed soldier with a rifle and a civilian with a handgun” shot the two men, De Lima said.

      She said Lontok’s body was found in a roadside ditch, where it rolled after the environmentalist was shot.

      Police records showed Lontok was hit 14 times. He took one shot to the head, one to the throat, one to the chest, two to the back, and nine to the legs. ”

      What are the chances now of ordinary innocent travelers on highways in the country approaching check or KILLING POINTS manned by cops in civilian clothes and soldiers in full battle gear? ZERO!

      FIRE! And gov’t keeps saying “This will [not] happen again.” It keeps on happening. The roles of our PNP cops now are now different: To Protect Themselves and to KILL the others!

      This is off topic but FIRE! is not. Getting back that bored 5%?… @@baycas & Parekoy….

  7. 33
    Parekoy says:

    With passing of the RH Law, the next logical step is Divorce Law!

    If congress proposes a Divorce Bill, then adultery laws will be reviewed to harmonize the intents of the Family Code.

    Most likely the proponents of Divorce Bill are also going to push for the elimination of Adultery or lessening the punishment regarding Adultery. Adultery will just be treated as a strong example of infidelity, which will be one of the grounds for divorce. Spousal abuse, rape, neglect, insanity, or even irreconcilable differences can be grounds for divorce. Alimony and child support will of course be the consequence. Alimony could be conditional, like if the party who was guilty of adultery or concubinage will not be entitled to received any amount, there might be even some monetary award for the aggrieved.

    Adultery can also be harmonized wth Cybercrime Law, and congress will review and decide the definition of cyber sex.

    If the above are accomplished, then I can commend the law of representatives, for once, did their jobs.

    The Philippine Constitution is a living document, it should go with the need of the times! It should grow its backbone and divorce itself from the dominant influence of the Catholic church and it should be true to the needs of its citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs.

    • 33.1
      Parekoy says:

      Calling on Bar Reviewees!

      You can hone your debating skills here, educate us, at the same time have fun.

      I suggest you can have a handle like, PLM001, Arneo001, UP001, Bedan001, etc, for obvious affiliation.

      Shout out to PLM debaters for defeating Ateneo Law about the firecrackers issue!

    • 33.2
      leona says:

      Again! Lawmerriers gonna pass another important bill – DIVORCE? Same style – no study, no consultation, no enough time, YES hurriedly!

      We don’t trust ‘em anymore! They have the vote numbers of defective bills passed, the trend now.

      We’re being fooled and mistreated by them. Politics are mixed with personal gains at our expense. We should see to it that some of our lawmerriers be out of office to recoup the integrity and credibility of lawmaking in Congress.

      Imagine even people’s money are mistreated as GIFTS these days! to lawmerriers. Broaday lights no shame while many people, like in the South, are in so much dire need of HELP.

      Disgusting situation!

      • 33.2.1
        leona says:

        Senator vs Senator vs Senator…! pera perahan palagi! Read this link

        “nterAksyon.com
        The online news portal of TV5

        MANILA, Philippines – Claiming that a colleague in the Senate is using government funds for personal expenses, Sen. Panfilo Lacson on Thursday urged the Commission on Audit to examine how senators disburse money from their regular and additional maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE).

        “The desired end state of my proposal is to file graft charges against the senator concerned if the evidence warrants,” said Lacson in a text message to reporters.

        The legislator allegedly uses MOOE to pay for the salaries of maids, buy groceries for the family, as well as pay for the rent of a satellite office within a property that the lawmaker owns, according to Lacson, adding that thdetails about his colleague’s expenses are documented and are “in the records of the Senate.”

        “All I can say is, isang senador lang ‘yong mga maids sa bahay sa Senate naka-payroll, ‘yong asawa, may grocery allowance sa Senate at ‘yong satellite office rental, sarili niyang property,” said Lacson in a separate radio interview Thursday.

        Earlier, Lacson engaged in verbal tussle with Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago calling the latter a “crusading crook.” Santiago also called Lacson the attack dog of Senate president Juan Ponce Enrile, who gave 18 senators P1.6 million each last year for their additional MOOE.

        Last week, Santiago also called on the COA to examine and reveal to the public the “so-called savings”of the heads of the Senate, the House of Representatives, and other goverenment agencies.

        Santiago said the COA audit would ensure “transparency” on how leaders of Congress and other heads of public offices use their “enforced savings,” which she called “the grandmama of all scandals.”

        Tama yun MRP sa ibang mga sulat nya! Early to fight early to bite! Elections coming unclean & bright! Look to your right…ekk! Look to your left…ekkk uli ! What’s happening to our senate, Mr. congressman?

        • 33.2.1.1
          leona says:

          They do pray for one another. But during fighting, in words naman, can we say one or both abandons or forgets the prayers?…

          “Chuanico said that the bursting of Santiago’s eye blood vessels was a definite warning sign that she is at risk of a stroke.

          “Technically, Sen. Santiago suffered a mild stroke after her television interview. Fortunately, the stroke went to her eye instead of her brain. If she continues as usual, a second stroke will be imminent,” Chuanico said.

          Enrile said that he would pray for the recovery of Santiago.

          “I am saddened by what happened to her. I’m sorry that she has to suffer that kind of pressure so I will pray for her recovery,” Enrile said. – With Marvin Sy”

          We don’t know…

      • 33.2.2
        clementejak says:

        Philippines is the only country in this world that do not have divorce law. What is the need to study and consult whom?

        The simplest reason for divorce is “irreconcilable differences” if either of the party refuses to reconcile then that is acceptable ground.

  8. 32
    Rudy Portugal says:

    I had a good laugh!

  9. 31
    pinay710 says:

    sigurado walang absent sa senado sa usaping cybersex. lahat kukuha ng kalutasan sa kanilang mga problema sa sexlife nila kasi halos LAHAT ng andun puro adulterer. cyberlibel ba ito komento ko? wala akong sinabing pangalan ha. pero totoo ito.

  10. 30
    manuelbuencamino says:

    RM can use his computer to activate remotely a devise that will insert itself in a woman’s vagina – a drone vibrator – and carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse na yun per the definition provided by RM.

    There is also an audio of the arguments in the SC re cybercrime. If RM listens to it he will find that an i-phone is considered among the gadgets covered by the cybercrime law, So his Iphone inside his kulasisi’s vagina is cyberadultery. Based on RM’s definition of carnal knowledge and the cybercrime law’s list of gadgets.

    • 30.1
      RM says:

      I beg your indulgence, your honor, but I do not think we really have to go that far in understanding the language of a law. We are under no obligation to lose our common sense.

      • 30.1.1
        manuelbuencamino says:

        Just quoting your definition and the cybercrime law, atorni. If there is no common sense in yours and the cybercrime law’s definitions then don’t lay the absence of it on my door.

        • 30.1.1.1
          manuelbuencamino says:

          Plus what is very clearly spelled out in black and white needs no interpretation. That’s common sense.

          • 30.1.1.1.1
            RM says:

            alright. alright.

          • 30.1.1.1.2
            RM says:

            I will have to agree with you Mr. Buencamino… As a matter of fact, we need creative and imaginative people like you in the practice… it’s good that there are people who could think outside of the box… Judges will be much more interested to conduct hearings knowing that a litigant like will appear in court… They will be totally amused by you… and by no means i say that in a sarcastic sense but really you, mister, are amazing… I hope I could meet you in person and shake your hand… =)

      • 30.1.2
        moonie says:

        yay! RM is lawyer? and he’s hiding under the handle of RM as in room? motel room? that says much about him. I think he’s pseudo lawyer, probably not registered, has not passed bar exam therefore, hides under RM. I think he’s a scammer pretending to be expert.

        • 30.1.2.1
          RM says:

          Hmmm… maybe… maybe not… oh btw, i didn’t know that there’s an internet access in the moon… moonie… =)

        • 30.1.2.2
          Victin Luz says:

          @moonie…whatever @RM commented I think it was good, interesting and educational topic for us non-lawyers. And besides with the fasttracking of the most advance computer/cyber TECHNOLOGIES ,,, maybe few decades from now TELEFORTATION will come into existence.

        • 30.1.2.3
          Baltazar says:

          @moonie
          honk…honk…oops! blow your horn or you might hit somebody.

  11. 29
    baycas says:

    Checklist

    (__) Pleasure
    (__) Mental problems (e.g., guilt, depression, delusion)
    (__) Sexually transmitted infections
    (__) Marital problems
    (__) Lives of children greatly affected
    (__) Pregnancy
    (__) Chance of being blackmailed
    (__) Chance of being ostracized by the community
    (__) Chance of being hurt or killed

    Identify which one to check in the following cases:

    1. Adulterous sex WITH contact
    2. Adulterous sex WITHOUT contact

    • 29.1
      pinay710 says:

      sir baycas, sa palagay ko yung dalawang kaso ay parehong pakikiapid,2 lang dun sa listahan ang hindi magiging resulta ng WITHOUT contact. pero ganun din yun PAKIKIAPID PA DIN YUN. kasi ang usapan dito CONTACT ng ari ng babae at ari ng lalake na pumapasok sa ari ng babae. pero nagco contact pa din ang ang ibang bahagi ng katawan nila maliban sa pagpasok ng ari ng lalake sa ari ng babae KAYA PAKIKIAPID PA DIN. pareho lang po yan.

      • 29.1.1
        baycas says:

        Thanks, @pinay, for your analysis.

        CPM is much more far advance than the Senate and Lower House!

        - leona

        I like @leona’s characterization of this blog as Court of Public & My opinion.

        I would like to invite @RM and @joedelacruise to comment on the checklist I posted above on the consequences of the RPC-defined adultery and the still-to-be-defined-but-actually-happening cyber adultery.

        The ease by which cyber adultery can be accomplished and perpetuated with almost the same effect as adultery (sans the consequences of STI and pregnancy) if caught and the relative difficulty of proving such wrongdoing may already justify the one-degree higher penalty that the Cybercrime Prevention Act laid down in its Sec. 6.

  12. 28
    leona says:

    Not cyberadultery but airport adulterated water bottle…click link…Don’t receive from someone any bottled water at airports – could contain drugs, etc. Sorry off topic but good for all!

    https://www.facebook.com/ajax/sharer/?s=11&appid=2392950137&p=10151155985775848

  13. 27
    leona says:

    Q. A married woman became pregnant. No sexual intercourse took place. Possible? Why not. Through A.I. = artificial insemination. Raissa’s initial reply to RM that the latter is looking at the prism of law of the past, etc. is loaded. To support that, here is an “Introduction” of the same, the link ‘

    “A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE ON ARTIFICIAL
    INSEMINATION
    INTRODUCTION
    DoMINGO G. CASTILLO
    AUGUSTO Y. HONG
    LORNA T. PATAJO-!CAPUNAN *
    LEMUEL M. SANTOS
    ROMEO R. STO. TOMAS
    Medical science is continually discovering new methods and techniques.
    Legal rules do not generally anticipate scientific developments. Courts of
    law are thus often confronted with factual situations for which no definite
    legal rules apply. The problem is based primarily in a legal system which
    draws from rule& and regulations formulated at a time when future developments
    in science were not and could not have been fore.,een. Inconsistencies
    therefore result when the courts attempt to fit scientific achievements to
    a legal framework which, being outmoded, cannot help but be unresponsive
    to the current needs of society arising from medical a’1d technological
    advances.
    One such medical discovery is artificial insemination.”

    More from this I will try to put here. The discussion is so interesting so far.

    Can the same married woman who became pregnant via A.I. be considered as having committed adultery? Actual case will follow here.

    • 27.1
      leona says:

      The coming example of an actual case, though not yet related to re cyberspace of internet adultery but again, can be very possible. I will not give more personal comments except extracting them and placing it here for CPMers to consider it’s worth. Here is the actual case, [ the final link will finally end this ] –

      “A) The Marital Relationship -
      1. Adultery-
      Does a female who consents to A.I.D. commit adultery? In this
      jurisdiction a0ultery is a criminal act and “is committed by any married
      woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband
      and 1:-y the man who has carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be
      married, even if the marriage be subsequently void. “12 From this provision
      it can be gathered that sexual intercourse is an essential element of the
      crime of adultery. Sexual intercourse is a physical act which involves
      penetration of a female by a male. Accordingly, it would appear that
      artificial insemination should not constitute adultery since there is no sexual
      act of penetration.
      Actually, there are two conflicting theories on the nature of the crime
      of adultery. One, that adultery is necessarily and can only be committed
      by actual contact of sex organs, and the other, that the true essence of
      the crime is voluntary surrender of reproductive organs facilitating the introduction
      of spurious heirs into the family.13 The latter which obviates
      12 REv. PEN. COOE, art. 333.
      13 Perello & Salvador, Legal Aspects of. Artificial Insemmation in the Plzilippine
      Laws, 6 FAR EAST L. REv. 47 (1958) .
      146 PHILIPPINE LAW JOURNAL [VOL. 51
      the actual contact of sex organs was espoused in the case of Oxford v.
      Ox/ord.H

      The Oxfords had been married in Canada in 1913 and honeymooned
      in ‘ England. The marriage w~ !:~ver consummated due to the great pain
      that attempts at intercourse caused the bride. Mr. Oxford returned to
      Canada alone, his wife remaining in England for six years until 1919 when
      ~he also returned. In the interlude she had given birth to a child as a
      result of A.I.D. administered, allegedly, as a “medical cure” to enable
      her to enjoy normal sexual relations with her husband. When Mr. Oxford
      refused to receive her, she filed the suit for alimony.
      The court rejected the “therapeutic” argument and held that she had
      committed adultery. It held that impregnation per se is tbe test of adultery
      and that sexual union of the bodies or moral turpitude is of no consequence.
      The discussion of A.I.D. in Oxford is dictum since the Court
      disbelieved that the child was born as a result of A.I.D., basing its actual
      decision on a finding that it was the offspring of an adulterous relationship
      with another man.loS”

      • 27.1.1
        leona says:

        This is a Phil case of adultery. We’re not yet into cyberspace in this case. But we will.

        “Whether artificial insemination constitutes sexual intercourse and is
        thus within the contemplation of Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code
        is yet a matter to be decided locally. The possibility, however, of it falling
        within the &tatutory purview is quite remote, since in our jurisdiction
        all criminal cases requiring sexual intercourse as an essential element as in
        rape, seduction, abduction, have all involved physical contact of the actors
        and courts in all these cases assumed and looked upon sexual intercourse
        as “an actual contact of the sex organs of a man and woman and the actual
        penetration of the body of the latter.”21

        In the ca3e of U.S. v. Mata/2 however, our Supreme Court stated
        in a dictum that “the gist of the crime of adultery under the Spanish law,
        as under the common law in force in England and· the United States in
        the absence of statutory enactments, is the danger 0f introducing spurious
        heirs into the family, whereby the rights of the real heirs may be impaired
        and a man may be charged with the maintenance of a family not his own.”
        In tUs case Jacinta Mata, the defendant, and Marcial Tanedo Liu Chiu
        were married. The former had alleged carnal relations with the codefendant
        Quiterio Sarmiento. The · Court convicted them of the crime
        of adultery then defined by Article 433 of the Old Penal Code as “committed
        by the married woman who lies with a man not her husband and
        by him who lies with her knowing that she is married, although the marriage
        be afterwards declared void.”

        It should be noted that this case was decided under the Penal Code
        of 1870. From the peculiar phrasing of the provision the lawmakers intended
        to declare adulterous the infidelity of a married woman to her
        marital vows. Our Revised Penal Code precisely changed the wording of
        this provision and used the term sexual intercourse implying therefore that
        not any mere act of infidelity can be held to be adultery.

        Besides, the U.S. v. Mata case was decided without awareness of artificial insemination and therefore cannot be used as authority for determining whether artificial insemination is adultery under Philippine laws.
        \YJe feel that there is an obvious difference between A.I.D. and the
        clandestine physical relationship which usually accompanies adultery. The
        21 Perello & Salvador, op. cit., supra, note 13 af 48.
        22 18 Phil. 490 (1911 ) .
        1976] PERSPECTIVE ON ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION 149
        moral turpitude incident to an illicit sexual affair is simply not present.

        A wife is not being unfaithful to her spouse by attempting artificial impregn1tion.
        In fact she is bolstering another commonly held moral value
        - the stability of the family unit. As of yet, our courts have not been
        faced with a case on A.I. and have had no occasion to rule on this issue.”

        For me, there are enough facts to the above. Add the fact to the above facts that iPad or Samsung/Apple or desktop pc or laptop, via e-mails mainly were used to avail, etc. to have A.I. =artificial insemination, as a consequence impregnated the married woman, no sexual contact with a man was made -

        Is there cybercrime adultery by the married woman under RA 10175? [ not totally on the topic here - Or adultery under the Rev Penal Code only?]

        • 27.1.1.1
          • 27.1.1.1.1
            raissa says:

            Thanks for this.

          • 27.1.1.1.2
            RM says:

            as to the possibility of pregnancy with the use of artificial insemination, i have to concur with that. but as to the possibility that the courts will affirm the conviction of adultery based on artificial insemination is, in my humble opinion, remote. To undergo artificial insemination is not the same as having sexual intercourse. surely, they may produce the same results but it does not really concern the courts because insofar as they are concerned the only issue to be resolved in the adultery case, assuming the wife is married, is whether or not she had sexual intercourse with anybody other than her husband.

            I must admit I may have been inaccurate in my earlier comments about the insertion of an object in the vagina as part of the definition of sexual intercourse. i must have been referring to the sexual assault provision in rape and whoever pointed it out, thank you so much. However, i believe that even if there was no penetration of the penis, that what the husband actually witnessed was only say, a dildo being inserted by a man other than the husband, i really believe that it is sufficient already as to create a reasonable presumption that they engaged in sexual intercourse as defined under RPC. there are many cases where the SC convicted the wife of adultery based merely on testimonial evidence from some witness that the wife and the man not her husband frequent, say for instance, a lodge or motel or an inn. our SC at times takes judicial notice of the fact that motels here in the Philippines aren’t really what they are supposed to be as a business operation. besides, it all depends on the trial, especially during the cross examination of the witness. the witness may testify on the behavior, emotion, condition, appearance of the wife while entering the lodge with another man. that is why if you don’t have a direct evidence to prove a crime, you would usually be doubling your efforts to look for other relevant circumstantial evidence so as to make a reasonable presumption that there was such sexual intercourse that took place.

            take note that the evidence required in order to sustain a conviction of a criminal offense is “proof beyond reasonable doubt.” that is the highest in the quantum of evidence. If you look at the requirement, you would notice that it does require that there should be no doubt at all as to the commission of the crime. this means that you can convict a person even if there is a doubt, provided that is merely a trivial, irrelevant, flimsy, unreasonable doubt. but if the doubt is something reasonable as when it is not sufficiently proven by evidence, then you have to acquit. good evening everyone.

            • RM says:

              *correction* last paragraph: “xxx you would notice that it does NOT require that xxx” instead of “xxx you would notice that it does require that xxx”

              • leona says:

                @RM…is there any or more correction on this quote – “this means that you can convict a person even if there is a doubt, provided that is merely a trivial, irrelevant, flimsy, unreasonable doubt.” ?

                “Doubt” becomes subjective in determining proof beyond a reasonable doubt per your opn. But what is required ‘are facts’ to conclude proof to convict or acquit the accused. Even ‘circumstantial evidence’ [ as you maintain] ‘goes’ into a ‘picture’ leading or showing ‘the facts’ by ‘imagination’ as the eyewitness or ‘husband’ did not see ‘actually’ the ‘element’ of the crime (Adultery) – actual sexual intercourse or ‘penetration.’ It is only asked “Can the decision-maker put a picture in his/her mind there was sexual intercourse -based on ‘circumstantial evidence’ that point to that imagine ‘fact’?

                The ‘triviality,’ or ‘irrelevancy,’ or ‘flimsiness,’ and ‘unreasonableness’ on ‘doubt’ is not poised on the ‘fact’ whether ‘actual sexual intercourse or penetration’ is the crux of the matter. Those ‘conditonal qualifiers’ do touch on ‘other matters’ of evidence but not whether actual sexual intercourse or penetration did take place or did not take place. Can you please pound more on this. Thanks.

              • RM says:

                @leona… I dont know why I cannot reply to your post below but anyway, I really appreciate your undying enthusiasm in commenting or reacting on my thoughts. I would like to say that you hit the bulls eye, especially in your last paragraph. Now, we’re on the same page. This is your question: “Can the decision-maker put a picture in his/her mind there was sexual intercourse -based on ‘circumstantial evidence’ that point to that imagine ‘fact’?

                Let me answer your question by giving you an example. Say in a crime of homicide as defined under the RPC, the very element that you need to establish above all else, assuming that death of the victim was already established, is that the accused did in fact kill the victim. Absent any evidence to prove the existence of that particular element of the crime will result in the acquittal of the accused or dismissal in his favor. the problem however is that no one ever saw the actual killing of the victim by the accused. does that result in automatic dismissal of the case? of course not. as we have mentioned before, a crime may be established on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Say for instance, a witness testified that the he saw the accused enter the house of the victim at about 12:00 noon. then another witness testified that he was sitting on a gutter near the house of the victim when he heard a gunshot at around 12:05. then another witness testified that he saw the accused got out from the house of the victim at or about 12:08. Then the police testified they arrive at the house of the victim at or about 12:15 and found the body of the victim lying on the floor. that the victim died of a gunshot wound. that the bullet recovered from the crime scene was subjected to a ballistics examination and that the findings show that it came from a firearm owned and duly registered under the name of the accused.

                Take note, no one ever saw the actual killing. no one ever testified that he saw the accused killed the victim. the accused was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of homicide.

                Question: under the circumstances, is there a doubt as to the commission of the offense? the answer is yes. why? because no one ever saw the actual killing hence no one can say for certain that it was the accused who killed the victim. second question: is the doubt concerning the commission of the offense reasonable? of course not. the circumstances, based from all the evidence presented by the prosecution, all point to the very probability that it was the accused who killed the victim. take note that when you say circumstantial evidence, it refers to evidence on collateral maters which may establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. why is it called evidence on collateral matters? because it does not directly prove the fact in issue. what is the fact in issue in this case? whether or not accused killed the victim. To illustrate, the testimony of the witness who saw the accused entered the house of the victim. does that prove the fact in issue? otherwise stated, does that testimony, by itself, prove that the accused killed the victim? of course not. how about the testimony of the other witness that he heard a gunshot. does that mean that the accused killed the victim? of course not. by itself it is not sufficient to convict the accused of the crime charged. what we have here, however, are pieces of evidence which, if taken together, points to the probability that it was in fact the accused who killed the victim and no one else.

                According to SC: Hence, it has been held that a judgment of conviction based on circumstantial evidence can be upheld only if the circumstances proven constitute an unbroken chain leading to one fair and reasonable conclusion, to the exclusion of any other, that the accused is guilty.

                Having said this, i now go back to your question: “Can the decision-maker put a picture in his/her mind there was sexual intercourse -based on ‘circumstantial evidence’ that point to that imagine ‘fact’? Yes. In the first place, there is, as you call it, an imagined fact, like in the situation of the homicide case i mentioned above, because no one ever saw the accused kill the victim. Can the judge put a picture in his/her mind that the killing was done by the accused? Yes, if supported by circumstantial evidence. is there zero doubt that the accused killed the victim? no. there is still doubt. one may infer that the victim merely used the gun of the accused and killed himself. that is a possibility. that is a doubt. but is it a reasonable doubt? it is highly unreasonable because (1) it is not supported by evidence, (2) it easily controverted by the evidence of the prosecution, (3) by using logic and sound reasoning, it is highly improbable that a person will borrow the gun of his intruder and voluntarily kill himself in the presence of his intruder in the absence of any assertion and evidence to that effect. there you have it. proof beyond reasonable doubt. have a nice day.

              • vincent says:

                ” i believe that even if there was no penetration of the penis, that what the husband actually witnessed was only say, a dildo being inserted by a man other than the husband, i really believe that it is sufficient already as to create a reasonable presumption that they engaged in sexual intercourse as defined under RPC.”

                I agree with you, and if anyone insists or is adamant that there is no sexual intercourse until a penis is inserted into a vagina of a woman, but whose clitoris and vulva was/is being licked by the man not the husband of the woman, then let’s make oral sex a trendy diversion for our own sexual satisfaction and not feel guilty about it because we are not comitting adultery, for it does not constitute sexual intercourse, after all.

            • jorge bernas says:

              @ RM,

              How do you call an OB gynecology male doctor inserting his finger/s or an instrument into the vagina of his patient for any reason was that an act of Adultery, Sexual lntercourse or Rape?

              • RM says:

                If the act was done in the course of the performance of his duty or by virtue of his professional employment, he is not liable for any crime. The legal principle involved is actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. the act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intention were so. In your example, in the absence of any extraordinary circumstance, he will be presumed to have done it in the performance of his professional duty. In other words, it is the burden of the patient to prove that there was criminal intent on the part of the gynecologist to commit the an act which is punishable under the RPC or in special laws. If proven, he may be held liable for rape, violation of RA 9262, etc but not adultery unless he engaged in sexual intercourse with his female patient knowing her to be married.

              • jorge bernas says:

                @ RM,

                Thank you very much….

        • 27.1.1.2
          Victin Luz says:

          I am impressed about your topic of artificial insemination @mam Leona…..in relation to CYBERADULTERY . In an A.I. , donated sperms implanted at uterus produces an infant while at CYBERSEX ( adultery ) if any there is no offspring to speak off.

          In your explanation mam@Leona , a woman can be convicted of adultery if her husband has no approval or concurrence to the A. I. biological process because the woman will be introducing spurious heir within the woman’s family, ” ganoon ba Ito” Also mam, how about the donor of the sperm, what will be his liability if the woman will be convicted of adultery? He he ang ganging topic Ito.

          How about a TEST TUBE process of producing human being mam? Will there also be crime committed for the sperm and egg cell DONORs if ever an supurius HEIRs are also introduce to a family.?

          Siguro since the beautiful topic will be related to CYBERCRIMEs in the near future especially when TELEFORTATION of things will come into existence , ” baka naman pweding enlighten us more @mam leona and other lawyers in the blog.

    • 27.2
      Victin Luz says:

      @mam Leona …I googled your criminal law AKA. adultery and other crimes it say’s in an especiall circumstances like INSERTING an I phone 5 to a vagina….. The condition of the MIND of the participants must be considered or construed strictly………. So the possibility or impossibility of a woman at NORMAL CONDITION to insert such is of no moment because it will never happen unless that I phone5 looks like PENIS having some characteristics of the original.

      Please lecture us further on this LOVABLE TOPIC. Because as I go further I read that an an artificial insemination process without the approval of the donors sperm, the woman especially the womans husband constitute adultery. Thank @ leona

      • 27.2.1
        leona says:

        @Victin luz…what No.? did I put it here? Did I really? Parang hindi ako yun…Anyway, I finished placing what is relevant to Raissa & RM’s issue and for CPMers participation here. Pls give me that ‘No.’ item. Thanks.

        • 27.2.1.1
          Victin Luz says:

          @mam Leona ….sorry po, what i mean I read lawyers book on criminal law and basing those fact’s narrated thereat about adultery,,,,,in my own little understanding and analysis the STATE of MIND of a WOMAN allowing herself that an Iphone5 will be inserted on her vagina shall be primarily considered to be accused of such crime and………

          Even if a computer genius will discover/invent and/or perfected MICRO CHIPs to satisfy both parties having CYBERSEX, it will never , can never be charged of Adultery because ,……..now or during that time ( perfected CYBERSEX ) ….. The PICTUREs /PHOTOs of a Cyber Partners appearing on the MONITOR can be change in a split of a second ( say the face of Mona Liza but the body of Angel Locsin etc, ). How will the Fiscal and the Court now determine that , that picture will be original YOU? Or SHE? HOW? mahirap to prove diba.

          If I am going to have a CYBER SEX with my number 2 having known by me to have ” peclat ” at her face or ” pusod ” , why should I google with her photo, for sure I will ” pindot ” the picture of Kristine Hermosa .. mas enjoy ako kasi BAGONG putahi pa.

          • 27.2.1.1.1
            leona says:

            @Victin…my initial answer to your Qs under this Cybercrime law under TRO, is agreeing to Raissa’s question to ass sec SY, who [the latter] per Raissa’s article, said “there is no cybercrime of adultery,” then ‘why include adultery in the Cybercrime law and all the other crimes in the Revised Penal Code?’ which are all without CLARITY of the provisions

            Yes, you’re almost right, a very difficult issue to prove or even to charge under that Cybercrime law but it is there expressly as worded as foolishly understood even by laypersons as consequence of non-careful study and recklessness. Hurriedly passed! I do not know if DOJ and aggrieved parties for adultery will use such a law for adultery committed via cyberspace, with that Lovespak gadget, iPad, or other devices.

            Our lawmerriers just enacted a ‘crazy’ law.

      • 27.2.2
        leona says:

        @Victin.. baka si “@Lonoera” ‘o “Lenore” atbpa – idem sonam yun…hahaha.

        • 27.2.2.1
          clementejak says:

          I’ve seen ONLY one username “leona” posting on this blog”

          Pls read this to be enlighten how did artificial insemination evolved.

          Milestones in the History of Human Artificial Insemination

          1790 – John Hunter first reports artificial insemination in medical literature.

          1899 – Efforts begin in Russia to develop practical methods for human artificial insemination.

          1909 – Human artificial insemination grows more controversial. The Catholic Church objects to all forms of artificial insemination.

          1939 – The first animal, a rabbit, is conceived by artificial insemination.

          Mid 1940s – Artificial insemination becomes an established industry. In Nazi Germany, doctors performed artificial insemination experiments on Jews, gypsies and concentration camp internees.

          1949 – Scientists develop improved methods of freezing and thawing sperm.

          1950 – Cornell University scientists discover that antibiotics can be added to the sperm solution in artificial insemination processes.

          1953 – the first successful pregnancy from artificial insemination of frozen sperm is reported.

          1970s – The sperm bank industry is developed and aritificial insemination becomes commercialized.

          Human Artificial Insemination Today
          As the end of the 20th century neared, controversy and concern over artificial insemination in humans faded and the demand for donor sperm increased.

          • 27.2.2.1.1
            macspeed says:

            im really shocked…to all the expanded words and explanation about adultery in cyber space ….hayyyy

            nagtaksil si lalake or babae sa asawa nila, he he he gamit cyberspace di yata naaangkop sa actual na adulteriya…

    • 27.3
      moonie says:

      pleasey, please, please, leona, let us not forget the virgin birth. the immaculate conception. I would love to see DNA sequencing (mitochondrial one) done on bone samples of one supposed to be jesus christ, and then, comparing the result to the DNA of joseph of nazareth. they might just be biologically father and son. but, but, but immaculate conception it is. or we shall no christmas. and santa claus will lose his job.

      • 27.3.1
        Baltazar says:

        @moonie,
        And where did they get this supposed Jesus and supposed Joseph of Nazareth? Jesus bodily ascended and there is no DNA connection between Him and Joseph. If you are a Catholic or a Protestant just recite the Apostles’ creed and there’s your basic belief. There’s no need to wait for a stupid DNA test result.

        • 27.3.1.1
          Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          @Moonie, read here, factutom pablum impactum

          Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae,
          et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum, Dominum nostrum,
          qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine,
          passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus,
          descendit ad inferos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
          ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris omnipotentis,
          inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos.
          Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,
          sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem,
          remissionem peccatorum,
          carnis resurrectionem,
          vitam aeternam.

          • 27.3.1.1.1
            Alan says:

            “credulum impactum “– naniniwala ka sa impakto?

            • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

              Aw, c’mon, Alan, sweetheart. That is just for effect. An atheist does not believe in impakto, manghuhula, sigbin, demonyo and most of all DIOS MIO. he! he! he!

              • Alan says:

                (1) An Ateneo graduate, no less, an atheist? Goodness gracious, what is the world coming to?
                (2) We’re sweethearts? I thought you were married to Ignacio?

          • 27.3.1.1.2
            Vibora says:

            You really are out of your mind. You don’t know what you are doing. May the Lord God have mercy on you.

          • 27.3.1.1.3
            moonie says:

            you speaking in forked tongue?

          • 27.3.1.1.4
            Parekoy says:

            @Pacifico,

            Malas ka talaga ‘tol, dami mo ngang sakit, nasapian ka pa.

            syet talaga ‘tol. awang-awa na ako sayo.

            Mga komenters dito, compassion namana dyan, magnonovena naman tayo …F**k talaga Syet! malas ka talaga ‘tol

          • 27.3.1.1.5
            Parekoy says:

            @Pacifico,

            (Kidding aside)

            If you have kids (bless them), and serious about latin, I recommend you start them with the Minimus Series, then onto Cambridge Latin Course or Wheelocks seem good too. Your kids will treasure the books, they will help them to appreciate the beauty of the Romantic Languages.

  14. 26
    Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

    I am soooo tired of slow intermittent internet connection. Can someone dig up whatever happened to benign0 wooing ZTE to comeback to Philippines. I do not care if ZTE brings along their aircraft carrier as long as I have fast internet. I do not care if ZTE bribes anyone in the telecom bureau JUST GIVE US THE SPEED !!!!

    • 26.1
      Alan says:

      I heard all the modems and routers are stashed in a closet in Gloria’s hospital room

    • 26.2
      macspeed says:

      @MRP, perhaps somebody adulterated your connections, guess who he he he those who cant understand your cultured 6th sense dimensions…just play along with us, the CPM’s, but limit your raping act, we may become preggy here he he he

  15. 25
    joedelacruise says:

    Good day to everyone….

    Amusing. That is how I rated this current blogpost by Madame Raissa.

    Much as I hate agreeing with anybody, I have to do it again here. I agree with the views of RM in his example, the crime will be, or should be, adultery and not cyber adultery.

    Please remember, everybody, there is no crime yet called “cyber adultery” – there is no legal definition and jurisprudence is still lacking – perhaps a test case can be tried soon enough so that a court may rule on what may constitute “IF done through, by, and with, the use of information communication technology” to make an RPC crime a “cyber crime”.

    Madame Raissa’s comment to RM:
    “You are looking at the law from the prism of today and yesterday.”
    Courts can only rule based on today’s law and yesterdays’ court rulings. Surely, future laws can be made, but in so far as they have not been enacted and enforced, they will remain only in the realms of speculation and It’s best not to dwell on them on present cases.

    As an aside, I couldn’t let this opportunity pass without making a somewhat humorous comment, which will be a very rare occasion for me because I don’t smile often.
    In RM’s example, if presented in court, a lawyer or a judge might ask: “At the time of the insertion, was the iphone connected to the internet?”

    Thank you all.

    • 25.1
      leona says:

      @joe….that’s cruel precyber sodomy if not connected to internet! The issue of RM with Raissa are definite hypothetical facts for definite hypothetical answers…there’s TRO so far on RA 10175. CPM is much more far advance than the Senate and Lower House!

      KUDOS TO ALL CPMers!

      • 25.1.1
        leona says:

        ..that’s @joedelacruise…brod of Tom…

      • 25.1.2
        macspeed says:

        Yeahhhhh, we are advance (isinama ko na sarile ko sa CPM he he he please), kulang sa quality control ang Senate and the Lower House, panay pera nasa utak nila, sundin si Ping Lacson, i-audit ang mga nagastos nila, pera ng Bayan nilulustay nila sa Kalokohan…

      • 25.1.3
        baycas says:

        CPM is much more far advance than the Senate and Lower House!

        - leona

        I like that characterization of this blog as Court of Public & My opinion.

        I would like to invite @joedelacruise to comment on the checklist I posted above on the consequences of the RPC-defined adultery and the still-to-be-defined-but-actually-happening cyber adultery.

        The ease by which cyber adultery can be accomplished and perpetuated with almost the same effect as adultery (sans the consequences of STI and pregnancy) if caught and the relative difficulty of proving such wrongdoing may already justify the one-degree higher penalty that the Cybercrime Prevention Act laid down in its Sec. 6.

        • 25.1.3.1
          leona says:

          @baycas…cybercrime adultery will surely create a lot of ‘VIBRATIONS’ ‘n ‘BUZZINGS’ to everyone’s iPad, iPod, Pcs, atbpa!

          Ang ‘Divorce’ bill, if & when, as maybe hurriedly passed also will include it in the Cybercrime Law [under Special Laws & RPC clause] allowing all cybercrimes physical injuries, threats, grave and slight coercion, frustrated and attempted homicide against a spouse, abuse of a spouse, maltreatment – mental, physical & spiritual, atbpa, committed by use of the Internet as grounds for divorce?

          It going to get worst with more petitions at the SC!

  16. 24
    Jan says:

    Criminal laws are strictly interpreted. When the law requires the act of sexual intercourse as a requisite to a crime, you cannot expand it to include cyber sex, even when sex toys — or in RM’s example — a cellphone is used.

    • 24.1
      Victin Luz says:

      @Jan…… What was not included is excluded or what was excluded is not included…..tama ba ang na google sa LAW @Jan?

      • 24.1.1
        RM says:

        You cited a legal principle in the interpretation of a provision of law. that is correct. In fact it may also be applied in the interpretation of contracts. In law, we call it expressio unius est exclusio alterius. The express mention of one person, thing or consequence implies the exclusion of all others.

        EX. Under Rule 130 Sec. 25 of the Rules of Court. No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants.

        Thus applying the principle mentioned above, a person may be compelled to testify against his cousin, brother, sister, uncle etc…. as you notice, however, this principle may appropriately be invoked in cases of provisions which involve an express enumeration of things or persons etc.

  17. 23
    Gene Simmowns says:

    Reminds of the 1993 movie Demolition Man.

    Where Spartan (Stallone) and Huxley (Bullock) engaged in sex…not the traditional way…but by using helmets that simulates sexual intercourse.

    Here were the actual lines, took it from the internet:

    Lenina Huxley: I was wondering if you would like to have sex?

    John Spartan: [surprised] Here? With you? Now?

    Lenina Huxley: [nervously, nodding] Mm-hmm.

    John Spartan: Oh yeah.

    Next scene, Huxley then gave him a head gear to wear. Spartan, at first was hesitant, but still decited to try it out as he didnt want to embarass Huxley . Next scenes were really funny! When he closed his eyes, he was surprised to see a virtual Huxley and found himself gasping and of out breath – caused by the friggin head gears electrical pulses.

    [after futuristic, contact-free "sex"]

    John Spartan: Look, Huxley, why don’t we just do it the old-fashioned way?

    Lenina Huxley: [stands up, shocked] Eeewww, disgusting! You mean… *fluid transfer*?

    Lenina Huxley: [stamping her foot] You are a savage creature John Spartan, and I wish for you to leave my domicile now!

    That was in the 90′s – Hollywood style.

    Now it’s getting better…that Lovepalz goes into the actual things…not just in the head!!

    • 23.1
      Baltazar says:

      Yeah, and the movie was really a sort of prophetic …it mentioned a President Schwarzenegger library ;-)

    • 23.2
      ElScorcho says:

      This also reminds me of the 90s film “Coneheads”, where the Conehead daughter put a “sensual ring” on her “flat-head” boyfriend and proceeded to have Conehead sex with him. Also, the look of alarm on Beldar Conehead’s face when he found the said devices in his daughters room: “Argh! Sensual rings!”

      The scene from “Demolition Man” was actually ripped off in a local film starring Eric Quizon. He and his on-screen partner put the tips of their fingers together, covering themselves with (visible) static electricity, and made faces.

  18. 22
    Rene-Ipil says:

    @Raissa, you said:

    “But I want to thank you, RM. This definition of sexual intercourse you gave as – “the act of a person inserting…any other object in the vagina of a woman” – makes cyber adultery possible.”

    I must warn you not to take the words of RM as gospel truth in regard to his definition of sexual intercourse. Erudite RM maybe, he committed a gross mistake of foisting on us an erroneous definition of sexual intercourse. Maybe he missed reading Article 266-A(2), as amended, of the RPC in regard to how rape is committed through sexual assault, as follows:

    “”2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.”

    Paragraph 1 above refers to simple rape. As it is, simple rape is committed via sexual intercourse while rape through sexual assault is committed by using the penis or any instrument or object.

    Saxnviolins@11, you are right. Thank you for alerting us early on.

    • 22.1
      jeproks2002 says:

      i agree. the erroneous definition has caused much confusion. perhaps RM would also like to share his definition of “any other object”. Is a finger an object? Will a man who inserts his finger in the vagina or any other orifice of another be guilty of rape? If the finger is not an object, will a finger with a ring be then considered as within the definition of “any other object” now?

    • 22.2
      macspeed says:

      @Rene Ipil,

      wow, i thought that only instrumentation has Orifice which restrict the flow of Fluid, he he he he my goodness, i am really shocked to the max he he he he i just learned it from here hayyyyy the anus is an orifice as well he he he, well??? i dont want to add, it may damage the control system of the Petrochem Refinery he he he

    • 22.3
      RM says:

      You are correct. the definition of sexual intercourse must not be expanded as to include the penetration of any other object. however, adultery may be proven even without a direct evidence showing sexual intercourse. even if the testimonial evidence only refers to an object or oral sex for instance. If the lawyer is good, he may convince the judge that sexual intercourse took place even without such direct evidence. in other words, i mentioned it in the context of prosecuting the crime of adultery. but if we are going to limit our discussion to the elements of adultery, then, we stick with the original meaning of sexual intercourse. and thank you for pointing out the provision on rape. that helps a lot in understanding the concept of rape.

      • 22.3.1
        Rene-Ipil says:

        RM@22.3

        Your expression of gratitude is always welcome. Your comments are most welcome also. They definitely enrich the CPMers knowledge, warts and all.

  19. 21
    Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

    Enough sex already. Let the cybercrime adultery law get passed.

    • 21.1
      JJ says:

      After reading some of the excahnges, it’s but noticeable that most of the bloggers here are all awe when it comes to sex. I don’t blame you. Hahahaha
      My point is about the Revised Penal Code inserted in the Cybercrime Law.
      I guess it’s about time to REVISED the revised penal code again. Time has changed and will keep on changing. Or best, just write a new Cybercrime law alone without inserting the Penal Code. IMO.

      • 21.1.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Well, sir, it appears Filipinos loves INSERTION and PENETRATION into laws among others …

      • 21.1.2
        leona says:

        @JJ…right you are! When it comes to bloggers’ sex issue, that is too much to curtail the gratification we love [ @Parekoy ba ang nag sabi nito?] via cybersex. The SEC. 6 sentence is curtailing already free speech and free press, and then shoots to all other crimes in the Penal Code, which bloggers knows and anticipated, to include ADULTERY! In cybersex?

        Adul Adul Adul na yun! Sobra na! ‘Tery-ahin na!

    • 21.2
      macspeed says:

      he he he @MRP

      he he he you dont want sexy thing he he he you should do sex as always as Honeymoon, treat it as just married first time always and see the result he he he she will be more loving and fun he he he but yes only to your wife not to anybody else he he he

      now CPM’er knows your weaknessess he he he that is a cultural sexy message that shocked you somehow he he he kumonti yun mga blogss mo he he he

  20. 20
    edison elemento says:

    Raissa, theres a scene in the movie..Demolition Man..sylvester stallone/ sandra bolluck..where they use the net..{ sex without contact}….

  21. 19
    raissa says:

    At Comment No. 11 – 2 lawyers are arguing. – RM and saxnviolins.

    This I gotta watch.

    • 19.1
      Rene-Ipil says:

      Raissa@19

      I think that is the end of it. In fact, I thought of making a reply @11.1 but I decided to let it go. Anyway, I already posted a relevant comment @21.

    • 19.2
      baycas says:

      though i became a justice even before i thought of entering law school, i will pass on the occasion as i respect my ‘pañeros.

      besides, my mom doesn’t want me to watch Sex and Violence too much (i had enough today.).

      …well, there you go…i already hinted on whose team i’m rooting for.

  22. 18
    raissa says:

    At comment #4, @Baycas posted a video he found on how the device works

  23. 17
    andrew lim says:

    My head is spinning from the discussions on this topic. Just like genetic engineering, advances in electronics will keep lawmakers, the church and others very busy in trying to catch up with their definitions of what is legal/moral/acceptable.

    All I know is this: with those gadgets, you cannot have a safe and satisfying sex life if you have a slow internet connection.

    So in the spirit of the sexual revolution of the 60s: (hemline itaas! neckline ibaba!)

    BANDWIDTH ITAAS!
    INTERNET FEES IBABA!

    :)

    • 17.1
      raissa says:

      I second the motion.

    • 17.2
      Parekoy says:

      When I was a kid in the 70′s, I was wondering why my dicky got hard whenever I saw those women’s nipples trying to puncture their shirts. I love the 70′s.

      Women, please throw away your bras, those are the remnants of men’s hold on your sexuality! i feel you…

      • 17.2.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Jesus Mary mother of God @Parekoy, you were in your short pants in the 70s? I reckon you must be in your 60s today !!!

        Manoy, manoy, I am not expert on sex because I am still minor-de-edad. I am 25-years-old. I am still struggling with Pepe and Pilar and Noli Mi and El Feli. I am so tired of sex discussion. Enough already.

        I am not worried if this law is passed because historically PHilippine laws are more ignored than implmeented. Factutom Pobandom. Whatever.

        • 17.2.1.1
          Baltazar says:

          @mrp,
          If @parekoy was still wearing shorts in the 70′s, then we was probably in the elementary school those days so more or less he is my contemporary, mid-to-late 40s. Mukhang mahina ang connection mo sa discussion, naka 2G k ba?…pati calculation mahina. Btw, i found this quotation just recently:
          Do not argue with an idiot. They will drag you to their level and beat you with their experience.
          .Lastly, 25? A minor?

          • 17.2.1.1.1
            baycas says:

            @Parekoy @Baltazar,

            Nakakorto rin kayo noong ’70′s?

          • 17.2.1.1.2
            Parekoy says:

            @Baltazar

            I don’t argue with idiots, I show them compassion.

            They are tad beneath the uneducated, for the latter can still learn.

            Syet…mukhang inspired ako gumawa ng quote…
            (ganda na sana ng banat nagmura pa…f**k talaga)

            • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

              You are doing goot @Parekoy, you are now learning from me in mind and in words ! he! he! he! he!

              • Parekoy says:

                @Pacifico,

                Napikon si Johnny nung ikumpara ka ni Joe na pareho kayo intelligent. Hanap ka na ni Joe don sa kabila, punta na muna don at ulitin mo yung mga canned rehash comments mo, asarin mo naman yung mga naligaw don. Dumaan ka na rin sa ibang blogs na nilalangaw, magkalat ka na rin para mas dumami ang langaw.

                Pero balik balikan mo kami dito ‘tol, para laging may punchline.

                tol, bugbug ka dito tol, Syet talaga tol, kakainin ka ng mga commenters dito pag yung baon mo ay panis. Magkalap ka muna ng mga makokopya ko sa ibang blogs, tapos punta ka rito, kunyari creative ka.

                ‘tol hwag kalimutan yung tabletas, take it regularly… :-)

                (sa atin atin na lang tong advice ko sayo tol, baka kasi marinig ng iba kung pano ko ipakita ang compassion ko sayo baka mabigyan ka rin ng paalala.)

        • 17.2.1.2
          Alan says:

          It’s obvious naman you’re 25. IQ 25

    • 17.3
      Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

      A law lowering the internet fees and bandwidth? I AM ALL FOR IT !!!!

      • 17.3.1
        Vibora says:

        @MRP
        “A law lowering the internet fees and bandwidth? I AM ALL FOR IT !!!!”
        Lowering bandwidth? you are all for it???
        Alan is right, IQ = 25

        • 17.3.1.1
          Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          hawr! hawr! hawr! I got my grammar screwed. YOU KNOW WHAT I AM TALKIN’ ‘BOUT.

          Why are Filipinos so highly critical in englsichtzes usage when they know what I am trying to convey?

          Filipinos attack the messenger if they encounter compelling argument.

          They attack englischtzes grammar if they made a compelling statement.

          WHY IS THAT? Hang-gang englischtzes lang ba ang mga Filipnos?

    • 17.4
      Alan says:

      count me in

    • 17.5
      macspeed says:

      @andrew

      he he he he i am really shocked culturally he he he grabbeee naman yan sexual intercourse using iphone, he he he he

      pede ba nokia?? he he he

      i have to control my shocking experience today…please understand he he he

  24. 16
    Johnny Lin says:

    Latest Commercial News

    For those interested to buy the latest luxurious RM sex toy covered with Swarovski crystals, buy one now- free electrict toothbrush.

    Go to Greenhills Centralmall, Den-Hip trading, second floor besides the elevator, store with an Apple logo(without the bite) look for Cee-Lang

    Spectacular feature: glows intermittently while vibrating ending with a glaring flash similar to a fireworks show upon orgasm.

    Caution: not for oral use!

    • 16.1
      Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

      Calling Margarita Holmes … where are you … come out come out where ever you are … These people here needs sex therapy.

      • 16.1.1
        macspeed says:

        @MRP

        he he he he i am really shocked he he he i guess you are as well he he he he
        i thougt i got enough experience in Petrochem control and monitoring system, but those becomes mid average technology, now there’s too much control and monitoring which was never involved in any Refineries= Remote ecstasy hayyyyy grabeee
        is it a crime? Is it adultery??? he he he ass sec sy please, you are shocking my cultural dimensions he he he

      • 16.1.2
        Alan says:

        If Holmes isn’t availalbe we could call Arroyo. An expert in screwing. The country

        • 16.1.2.1
          Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          Aw, c’mon, Alan, have respect for the disabled near-death former president elected by the Filipinos. Who do you think of FILIPINOS? 25 IQ-pointers?

          They are lucky this time, by a fluke of nature, they elected crying benign0 Aquino. This time Filipino will vote in force for Binay. I hope he will be another fluke-by-luck.

          • 16.1.2.1.1
            Alan says:

            Did you bring the violins?

            • moonie says:

              I thought it was renato corona (mrp’s namesake) who is iyakin. seen crying many times on t.v. magaling umarte. that disabled and near-death former president is strong as an ox! ang bilis niyang makarating sa airport, buti kamo nahabol in de lima. that wheel chair is just a prop.

            • vander anievas says:

              near death? masamang damo, nunca. ang mutha ay hindi kayang lipulin.

  25. 15
    baycas says:

    Warning: NSFW
    (A re-post from the first Cyber Adultery thread)

    Wow, this blog never ceases to amaze me…

    It’s rather naughty or kinky…but I wouldn’t think that operational definitions of “cyber sexual intercourse” and “cyber carnal knowledge” will be insinuated here.

    Both, I have read in a few comments but somehow with improvement or modification, may mean:

    Sexual penetration or close sexual contact with a continuously ringing device or gadget equipped with 3G, 4G or LTE capability and put on Vibration mode

    Tsk, it is now even harder to prosecute because weak or bad signal may be a defense…

    Hmm, perhaps cyber adulterers will get hold of smart phones with dual, triple, or quintuple SIM cards.

    • 15.1
      baycas says:

      N.B. The above operational definition takes care to avoid Apple-centricity as Android and Windows devices/gadgets may also be used.

    • 15.2
      Alan says:

      LOL. “Your honor, I submit there was no adultery because there was no signal”

      • 15.2.1
        baycas says:

        @Alan,

        Judge shouted, “Case dismissed.”

        Then whispered to the accused, “Didn’t you try Wi-Fi?”

      • 15.2.2
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        WiMax Sucks !!! Globe Telecom WiMax dropped signal is frequent.

        PLDT do not connect to my barrio because they are only allowed one roll of wire from the main barangay road!

        So I have to contend with Globe Telecom WiMax.

        right now I am using smoke signal for back-up !!!!

    • 15.3
      Parekoy says:

      Namputsa, abswelto agad. Mahirap i prove beyond reasonable doubt :-)

    • 15.4
      leona says:

      btw…how will the ‘Judge’ know about the device/gadget unless he/she tries it on during court room trial for admissibility purposes. Defense will vehemently object if it is tried inside the judge’s Chamber by the judge alone…during a court recess?

      • 15.4.1
        baycas says:

        He tried it. That’s why he dismissed the case due to a recorded message he heard on the line:

        “Subscriber cannot be reached. Please try your call later.”

        Proof that the allegation of cyber adultery may not pass the “beyond the reasonable doubt” that the sexual act was indeed consummated.

        Incidentally, the judge tried the setup on his legal wife…for the record.

        • 15.4.1.1
          leona says:

          …then, what say you senators? Sotto? Angara? atbpa? You people didn’t anticipate PTY CL = please try your call later!

      • 15.4.2
        macspeed says:

        @leona he he he

        WHAT??? he he he he grabee, buti kung may K sya he he he

  26. 14
    YlocanaBelle says:

    and for those of you who remember Barbarella…perhaps this would better illustrate my point. “The most outrageous sex scene of the film ” Barbarella” is the one with Barbarella and the evil scientist Durand ” so if this isn’t sex then I don’t know what is! ;) http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1235u_barbarella-orgasmatron_fun#.UPcXHCdQFBk

    • 14.1
      duquemarino says:

      @YlocanaBelle
      Barbarella was portrayed by Jane Fonda and the contraption was called “Excessive Machine” then. Now it’s called “LovePalz”

  27. 13
    YlocanaBelle says:

    I think to say oral sex or sex using aps (LOL it’s the new word so why can’t we all be intelligent high tech people and admit reality?) is not having sex is delusional on the part of lawmakers. just like when somebody hires a hitman to kill somebody makes him the ‘mastermind’. same scenario here…the mastermind uses a ‘hitman’ in the form of a dildo or lovepalz and gets the desired effect doesn’t he? ;) btw unless he can’t get it up for any reason he’s still touching his peepee and she’s touching her weewee and that’s physically stimulating each other even while apart to consumate a ‘love encounter’ over the air cos he’s not talking to mr. postman or mrs. jones! just my humble sex opinion. amend those stupid laws now! and give women/men the right to divorce those cyber sex freaks! ;)

    • 13.1
      springwoodman says:

      Excuse me, all this talk of peepees and weewees is bothering me in a risible kind of way.

      It’s like we’re adults talking about sex but using baby language and euphemisms.

      The discussion would be more straightforward and clinical – and less hilarious – if we used the generic terms “genitals”, “penis”, and “vagina”.

      I would be the last one to quote Enrile but let’s call a spade a spade.

      • 13.1.1
        Parekoy says:

        @springwoodman

        genital, penis, and vagina are clinical terms.

        YlocanaBelle’s weewee seems naughty for my taste. It brings back memories when we were playing doctor. Keep using it YlocanaBelle. I need to get my stetoscope and speculum.

        • 13.1.1.1
          Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          @Parekoy, why it is not bastos to say sex in english but unspeakably bastos when it is sayed in Tagalog?

          • 13.1.1.1.1
            Parekoy says:

            Malalim yang tanong mo, freudian. Kailangang tanungin mo si Ambet Ocampo sa historical perspective at sa pychological si Aguiling-Dalisay ng UP.

            Baka merong legal explanation si Prof. RM…kaso baka sabunin ka non.

            • pinay710 says:

              @parekoy paki sabi kay mrp PAKIKIPAGTALIK o PAGTATALIK NG BABAE AT LALAKE ang salitang tagalog ng pakikipag sex. ari ng babae(VAGINA) ari ng lalake(PENIS) hindi bastos ang dating.

      • 13.1.2
        baycas says:

        Care to start it off in the vernacular? Pilipino or Tagalog, for instance…

        • 13.1.2.1
          Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          Why are Filiipnos not comfortable with the vernacular of penis and vagina ?

        • 13.1.2.2
          Baltazar says:

          ala eh, ka bastos naman pag tinagalog !

          • 13.1.2.2.1
            baycas says:

            :lol:

          • 13.1.2.2.2
            baycas says:

            @Baltazar,

            Medyo disimulado…at pang-eskuwela pa:

            Ti-squared (T-square)

            Ki-squared (Chi-square)

            • Baltazar says:

              @baycas
              LOL. But seriously, I realized that most Filipinos no matter how malicious their minds are would always try to euphemize the bastos english words..
              Way back in the early 80′s (and that was during my high school days..sarap!), the TikTik komiks-magazine gained its popularity. Back then, only those having 11mm home projectors ( and Betamax for the more affluent) could watch porno. And for us who are so curious about the stuff and whose pubic hairs are just in the category of a cat’s fur ( balahibong pusa ) can only get away with the TikTik. The magazine will be passed among the boys..and you’ll be lucky when the magazine reaches you with pages in tip-top condition because most of the time, they will be sticking to each other :-). ..and you know why.
              BUT here’s my observation: Authors and comics illustrators for those magazines would always use the less-taboo terms like:
              ari or sandata for the penis , hiyas for the vagina, kuntil for the clitoris , labi for the labia , mainit na katas for men’s cum and nektar for women’s cum/seminal fluid. Pasensiya na po CPMers,, just sharing and I hope this will educate us all in a positive way…pero kahit ako, nababastusan sa mga pinagsasabi ko. ;-)

      • 13.1.3
        macspeed says:

        @spring he he he

        your are shocked just like me and MRP who could not comment he he he

  28. 12
    tristanism says:

    So if I use that synchronized gadget mentioned in your blog with someone else’s wife in the next room, she’s not committing adultery?

    Nice.

    • 12.1
      raissa says:

      Try it and tell us about it.

      • 12.1.1
        tristanism says:

        Naw, I was merely reacting to RM’s definition of sexual intercourse in relation to cyberadultery.

        I belong to a breed of men collectively known as Takusa.

        • 12.1.1.1
          clementejak says:

          Takut sa asawa!

          There’s anaother term “Sansui”

          • 12.1.1.1.1
            baycas says:

            Ayos ang mga tropa…

            Takusa, UHAW, Sansui, Macho, at Tigasin.

            Pero talo ng lolo ng kapitbahay ko yang mga grupo na yan sa tinatag niya sa barangay…

            Combat!

            • Gene Simmowns says:

              Takusa is a bit harsh…hehehe!

              “Happy wife…happy life!”…as my Kiwi boss use to say…

              I strongly agree with him.

            • tristanism says:

              Let’s see.

              Takot sa asawa — Takusa

              Isang sutsot uwi — Sansui

              Tigasaing, tigalaba etc. — Tigasin

              Ano ung macho, UHAW at combat?

              • baycas says:

                Ang kuwento ng kapitbahay ko…

                Ang Lolo Leon daw niya ay minsang kasapi ng Unified Husbands Afraid of Wives kaya automatic ring naging Machonurin kay Lola Endeng.

                Kaya lang sadyang mahigpit at malupit si Lola Endeng kaya’t napilitang magtatag ng bagong grupo si Lolo Leon bilang kinatawan ng mga Andres sa kanilang barangay…

                Combatuk-batukan daw nga naman ni lola si lolo eh ganun-ganon na lang. Kalunus-lunos…

              • pinay710 says:

                bago yung SANSUI, ngayon ko lang nalaman yun. hihihihi

            • Baltazar says:

              @baycas,
              Wala yan sa lolo ng kapitbahay ko..Yun, abot tanaw pa lang ang asawa niya, yumuyukod kaagad. Miyembro kasi yun ng YUKOSA – Yukod sa asawa.

              • baycas says:

                ‘Yang Yukosa ang sinasabi ng lolo ng isa ko pang kapitbahay…

                Kalaban daw ‘yan ng Sigue-Sigue Commando. Mahirap daw makasapi sa samahang ito…

                May public humiliation daw!

        • 12.1.1.2
          macspeed says:

          he he he same feathers flucked together he he he pati sa mga anak takot din ako he he he sisipain dw ako pagtanda ko kung ako ay kukuha ng kabit he he he better not…

  29. 11
    saxnviolins says:

    In this example, the penetration was accomplished with the use of an iPhone, because as “RM” explained “carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act (of) a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.”

    No sir. Cite me your case which refers to “any other object”.

    Jurisprudence refers to “carnal union” .

    lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1951/may1951/gr_l-3047_1951.html

    That means union of the flesh (carne in Spanish, karne in Tagalog). It involves the union of the sword and the scabbard. Any object other than the sword (punyal if the guy is not so gifted) will not make it a carnal union.

    • 11.1
      RM says:

      Of course there has to be a physical contact of the penis and vagina.

      But I am talking from a different context. I am talking about the context of proving the elements of the crime of adultery in court. There is a whole world of difference between What you know and how you are going to apply what you know in court. To quote a famous line in the movie Law Abiding Citizen: It’s not what you know. It’s what you can prove in court.

      Say for instance, you just got home and when you entered your room you saw your wife, undressed, humping on top of a stranger. however, you were not able to see if there is really a physical penetration of the penis and the vagina because their lower extremities are partially covered by a blanket.

      He wanted to file a complaint for adultery and hired you as the lawyer. Are you simply going to decline the case because there is no direct evidence that would establish that there was physical contact between the vagina and the penis?

      Now consider it in this light. you entered your room. you saw your wife lying on her back with her legs wide apart. open sesame. before I am going to complete the picture, i suppose we are all adults here. So you saw the stranger fisting your wife. i dont think i need to elaborate on it more.

      Again, he hired you as his lawyer. Are you going to tell him that, hey unless and until you get me a picture of a penis of a stranger stuck in the vagina of your wife we do not have a case. That is the very fact that needs to be proved in court! Desperate, he asked for my help. I say we go file a case for adultery. Under the facts, it is already sufficient to warrant a conviction for the crime of adultery. How? By using circumstantial evidence and wits. This crime of adultery, this is often very hard to prove. So, according to the SC, the crime of adultery may be proved by circumstantial evidence. It’s like pieces of a puzzle which, if completed ,will lead you to a reasonable, credible, and logical conclusion that the act sought to be proved indeed happened. There are so many cases decided by the SC where the accused couples were not actually caught in the act doing the deed but still convicted them.

      But if we are not going to talk about the fact of proving a crime in court. We are just going to talk about the elements of a crime. the very facts that constitute the crime. I say we stick with the definition. And i agree with you. There has to be a carnal union.

      • 11.1.1
        Victin Luz says:

        @RM……..I am not a lawyer,……but in your meaning of sexual intercourse ….any other object inserted in the vagina thus adultery was committed thru circumstantial evidence upon proving in court ( granting you are going to apply what you know in court ) ……@RM , it will never be elevated to the court. At the FISCALs office the case of adultery will be dismissed outright because that ” any other object ” means similar object having physical appearance like ” OURs ” or POSSIBLE OBJECT — acceptable and allowed by the woman during that time having a NORMAL CONDITION of her MIND ( no drugs , no hypnotism , threat , intimidation ,bribery and etc..hav been employed ) or even at LUCID INTERVAL ..will fulfill satisfaction to the insertion base to what was inserted BUT NEVER an I phone 5……. any woman who allowed an I phone5 inserted in their vagina is mentally disturbed thus acquitting her of any crime of adultery especially if certified by a medical practitioner or a psychologist ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but maybe crime of RAPE must have been committed by the man.

        I just base my opinion on your circumstantial evidence…..

        • 11.1.1.1
          Victin Luz says:

          As I am googling your law book on criminal law…..I came across and IMPOSSIBLE CRIME of impossible circumstances…….so I say I phone5 .. An impossible object inserted in a vagina is an impossible evidence for the crime of Adultery to be passed on at FISCALs Office.

          But I will only agree with your comments if the I phone 5 , we were talking here was design as penis together with some of ours physical charactersictic like vibrators.

          If you want your circumstantial evidence to be accepted by by the court and the FISCALs I think you have also to qualify ” I phone5- inserted object to the vagina “

          • 11.1.1.1.1
            RM says:

            You seem to be interested with the study of criminal law. that is a good sign that perhaps you might wanna try enrolling even just for a semester. i guarantee that you will enjoy it. after all, the subject of criminal law 1 is included in the 1st semester. i really hope you consider my advice. =)

            • Victin Luz says:

              Ha ha @RM…… Ngek ayaw ko, mas masarap mag laro ng mahjong until midnight and wait for my pension when I reach the age of 65… Nandyan naman kayo nina @mama Leona to inspire us here on @RAISSas blog… Makikisawsaw nalang kami sa inyo sa kaunting naiintindihan namin sa mga isinusulat ninyo at mga nababasa namin sa mga libro ninyo Attu@RM….

              What I really want is to study and master on how can I/WE COLLECT an UNPAID COLA CLAIMS/DIFFERENTIALs ( for me 1.4m pesos ) since I retired on the year 2001. Our lawyers officemates had already collected fees to represent us in court but until now DBM so as our BOARD refused to released funds for us.

              Thanks @RM…. We are learning a lot from you.

      • 11.1.2
        pelang says:

        wow! i’m really enjoying this discussion. thank you guys!

  30. 10
    fed_up says:

    I have my surprise today with Ms Raissa’s blog; looking at the “Live Feed” pane on the right, I saw for the first time that this blog is also being read in Moscow City, Russia. Maybe the Russians are as interested as us Filipinos in the sexuality of things that are being tackled here: “a vibrating iphone being inserted into…., etc.”

    Maybe we are introducing into the world a new kind of “technology” on how to deal with ordinary matters.

    • 10.1
      Alan says:

      ICTs – Information and Communication Technologies – are ubiquitous and pervasive. In the 1990s Nicholas Negroponte noted how the world was being divided into atoms (for instance, a paper document) and digital bits (a pdf of that document). He predicted that many things we’re doing in “real” (atomic) life will have its equivalent in digital life or cyberspace

    • 10.2
      macspeed says:

      @feds

      he he he they are shocked to the max he he he like MRP, thingking about how stupid the cyber adultery is included in the cyber crime law he he he

  31. 9
    • 9.1
      RM says:

      Can i just reply to my own comment? I have to admit i really enjoyed reading your blog Raissa. =)

      • 9.1.1
        RM says:

        Forgive me for replying to the reply of my own comment… i just want say to that I like how you think Raissa. Very creative and imaginative. I totally support your cause against the Cybercrime Law. =) I sincerely hope and pray that it be declared null and void for being unconstitutional.

  32. 8
    Baltazar says:

    These toys (dildo & masturbator) were already existing for decades and with the touch,voice and graphic interfaces provided by smartphones nowadays , top it up with the capabilities of a 3G or 4G networks…my my my…cyber adultery can be real! In fact , this system can still be improved using PCs coupled with virtual reality helmets for 3D visuallization and brain computer interface devices that process cognitive responses ( just google for the terms please). Smartphones make up for the mobility which makes it possible even for a cable guy to have sex atop an electric post …syet! What remains is to really qualify cyber adultery into a crime and that is if the CCL passes.

    • 8.1
      macspeed says:

      i am cultured shocked again he he he he but slowly i can relate due to my automation experience in Instrumentation he he he now this is my delivery of cultural shock waves to CPM he he he

      it doesnt require a Law study to understand what is wrong and what is right, but if one is going for a debate regarding legal matters, you must be a Law graduate he he he

      galing naman nun LovePalz he he he the sensors is synchronized with each pair, if the other one goes on high speed, the pair device goes high speed as well he he he dapat dun lagi fully charge yun batteries he he he

      what a life, after ejaculation, each one will laugh and say, “we are crazy, aint we??? he he he anyways, i love you sweet heart, just be true to me and nobody touches that peanut except me he he he”

      • 8.1.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Hi! @Macspeed, BUSY BUSY BUSY OVER HERE ….

        Here is opinion of when sex is legal.

        When Bill Clinton gave his deposition in the Paula Jones case, he said he had never had “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky. But Lewinsky has reportedly testified to a number of acts that most people think of as sex. Can both statements somehow be true? Is it possible that the two of them had intimate contact, yet Clinton still did not perjure himself? In the intricate world of the law, a world of hairsplitting distinctions where the President is famously at home, it just may be so. Here’s why.

        At Clinton’s deposition, Jones’ legal team asked Judge Susan Webber Wright to approve a very precise, three-part definition of sexual relations. Clinton’s attorney Robert Bennett objected to the whole definition, but to the last two parts especially, as being too broad. Wright agreed to disallow parts 2 and 3, leaving only the first, narrowest definition of sex in place.

        With that, Clinton may have been given the room to offer a technically “true” denial to the question of whether he had sex with Lewinsky–even if she happened to perform fellatio on him. The truncated definition characterizes sex in terms of a checklist of body parts, including the genitals, breast and thigh. Oral sex would not necessarily require the President to touch anything on Lewinsky that appears on that list. Strange as it may sound, under one reading of the definition, Lewinsky could have been having sex with him (because she was “touching” the President’s genitals) while at the same moment, he was not having sex with her. (At the deposition, Clinton wasn’t asked if she had sexual relations with him, just if he had them with her.) Isn’t the law a wonderfully intricate device?

        There are problems with the legalistic defense. For one thing, if Clinton and Lewinsky did have oral sex, is it really likely that he did not touch any body parts mentioned in the Jones definition? (Lewinsky has testified that Clinton fondled her.) And because that definition says that a person engages in sex if he or she “causes” contact with the genitals of “any person,” it could be argued that Clinton caused Lewinsky’s contact with his, even if he did not otherwise touch her. He could reply that she was the cause, or at least the active partner, while he was merely the passive receiver, but that makes him seem like either an implausibly shrinking violet or a very cool customer. Beyond all that, Lewinsky’s secret grand-jury testimony may simply be so detailed and explicit that it leaves no room for loopholes.

        Even if the word-wiggle keeps Clinton out of the perjury trap, it won’t help him politically because it doesn’t account for his Jan. 26 televised insistence that he “did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” When he spoke before the cameras, the lawyerly definition of sex wasn’t in force. And in a recent TIME/CNN poll, 87% of those questioned said that oral sex was, well, sex. Hiding behind the ultimate tortuous legalism could help the President get through his testimony, but it won’t pass the laugh test with the American people–which is why Clinton won’t be parsing the meaning of “sexual relations” in any public statements.

        • 8.1.1.1
          Parekoy says:

          Wow! Now you are scaring me!

          @Raissa, can you please check if another account is using Pacificos handle.

        • 8.1.1.2
          Alan says:

          A lucid Ignacio moment. Off on a tangent, may we wonder if Arroyo still has time for sex?

          • 8.1.1.2.1
            Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

            Eowwww !!!! Alan, Alan, Alan. Leave Aling Glo alone. Everbody is aware that Aling Glo dumped benign0 Aquino that is why benign0 Aquino is soooo angry at her.

            • Alan says:

              What made you think I was talking of Gloria? I never used the word “corrupt”

              • Parekoy says:

                @Alan

                Mukha ngang hindi na. Last time ko syang nakita na halos maiyak nong impeachment ni Corona, masyadong bugnutin.

                Mukhang si Omb. Carpio ay mas may glow pa sa kanya.

          • 8.1.1.2.2
            Baltazar says:

            Ask Nani Perez :-)

            • Parekoy says:

              Oy si Baltazar, may alam din :-) Ilang milyon katumbas ng bigote ni pogi, ala eh, tumirik daw ang mata, tsismis lang yun, kaya. Mataning nga si cristy Fermin…

              • Baltazar says:

                Ay kabayan eh…. alaman mo naman ang tulis naming mga Batanguenyo.. – balisong – saksak dine saksak doon…at hindi tsismis …he he :-) Kita mo’t nagpa taas pa ng boobs.

          • 8.1.1.2.3
            moonie says:

            didn’t gloria arroyo ask for internet connection while still in veterans? she also ask for cell phones to be provided to her. madre mia. was she thinking of cyber adultery then?

  33. 7
    Parekoy says:

    @Raissa,

    (bulong mode ho ito…)

    may nagpapatanong lang po, yung kaibigan ko po na nasa abroad. saan daw po ba pwedeng ma order ito, sa amazon ho ba meron nito? sabi po daw ng asawa nya, meron daw ho bang model na parang may bulutong? yun din daw hong kaopisina nya, nagpatanong na rin kung may model na double aksyon? yun ho palang pilyong janitor nila nagpatanong na rin, meron din daw ho bang ibang accessories na yun ho daw parang alligator clips na pwedeng ilagay sa mga utong. iyon hong nurse, nagpatanon na rin kung meron din daw ho ba itong manual mode para po sa singular usage (siguro ho ibig sabihin nya, nagsasarili), yun hong isang pilyang nurse na nakailan na pong boyfriend na arabo nagpatanong din daw ho sa kanya- baka daw po taiwanese size lang daw po ang available model bale baka daw ho malugi daw ho sya sa bayad, alam naman daw ho natin yung sa mga tsekwa yung XL nila ugat pa lang pa ng mga arabo.

    pasensya na po maam, napagbilinin lang ako. promise po hindi para sa akin ito. promise po talaga. mamatay man po si Pacifico, talaga pong hindi para sa akin ito. talagang talaga po…napansin ho ako ng kaopisina ko na habang nagtatyp ako nito, namumula raw ho ang pisngi ko, sabi ko po sa kanya natural lang po pag pinanganak na tisoy…pasensya na po, promise hindi talaga ito para sa akin…

    salamat po…

    • 7.1
      raissa says:

      @baycas – pakitulong nga sya. Magaling ka sa pag research sa internet.

      • 7.1.1
        netty says:

        hahaha, sabog ang laway ko pagtawa. Uy Penoys talaga. Wait ka lang baka meron dito sa Canada E-bay. What color do you prefer, brass , aluminum chrome , gold or silver. Would you like any upgrade at the tip like studded with diamonds, precious
        stones or semi precious, luminous or not? Pwede rin siguro additional warranty for 2-3 years in case not working well. Mind you batteries not included, so saksak mo na , i mean plug in na, sori CPMERS ALIW NA ALIW LANG AKO TALAGA DITO SA BLOGSITE NA ITO, eto caps na nga eh. Sobrang saya.

        • 7.1.1.1
          fed_up says:

          @netty. Order din ako, basta hindi “Made in China”. Mas epektibo siguro ito kaysa sa “boletas” na inuso ng mga Pinoy seaman noong 1970s-1980s. Alam na alam ng mga maritime nations sa Ejrope ang Pinoy “technology” na ito. Hindi mo kasi maitatatuwa ito pagdaan sa security scan sa mga airport, tutunog yong scanner nila. Ngingiti na lang yong security kaysa pilitin ka na ipakita sa kanya.

          • 7.1.1.1.1
            Parekoy says:

            Minsan binanggit ko kay misis na bawasan. Gawing tatlo na lang na jade, kaysa lima, kasi na-stuck minsan. Nagtampo sa akin, hindi ko na raw sya mahal. Anong nagawa ko, di status quo.

            • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

              Why bother dildo. It is expensive. Why not use eggplant instead. Cheap and edible.

              • macspeed says:

                he he he he my goodness he he he eggplant fried and sliced to 1/4″ are good for Falapilsandwich rather than shawarma, it is a snack sandwich with sesame paste, onions,ketsup, fried potato, fired cullyflower and tomatoes sliced he he he delicious, he he he with food around, not guilty of adultery he he he i just eating snacks he he he

            • fed_up says:

              @Parekoy. When I was still working as seaman, we had this story of a Ch. Engr who went home for vacation after finishing his 10 mos. contract on board. He had a “bearing” (boletas) put on his manhood without telling his Mrs. about it. On their first night, the wife came to know about it, she was so scandalized being an active lay minister in their local Catholic Church. She wanted to have the “bearing” removed at once but since they were living in a small town in an island in Palawan, he feared going to the local doctor to have the “bearing” removed. He will surely be the talk of the town. What happened was, he prevailed on his wife retain the it and have it removed on board the ship when he goes back to sea in three months at the end of his vacation period.

              When he went back to sea, the first letter he received from his wife was her wife’s plea not to remove the “bearing” anymore!!!!

              • Parekoy says:

                A cousin of mine had his boletas. He waited a week to heal the entry on his foreskin. Then, he was to excited and paid a hooker. They had sex. When it was time to pay, the hooker still with a glow, declined and said it was for keeps!

                When my cousin was putting on his underwear, he was surprised, the boletas were gone, and left was a bleeding foreskin. Fuck!, he said. Tried to recover it from the hooker, did so, found the 5 balls and the hooker let out a scream! She climaxed again!

                Before he left the room, the hooker gave him hug, a kiss,then slipped some bills inside his pockets!

                Once he was inside his car, he took out the bills, found some hunded bills, a note with a cellphone number, and a message that if he got those balls back, then the next tryst will be free!

                That’s when I decided to have those too. The dick looks like it has some smooth big warts, but it is worth having them.

              • macspeed says:

                he he he he ball bearing, 316SSL (this is the steel that withstand corrosion in Petrochem he he he 316 stainless steel Low carbon) grabee pinoy he he hehe

              • Diwata says:

                that’s a lot of BULLitas! LOL having those bolitas under your foreskin doesn’t do anything for a woman. ang dapat sa mga lalaking gustong maging happy si esmi is to practice with his dila! hay ano ba? ang pinoy kasi masyadong macho kuno e wala naman hanggang 4″-5″ dagdagan pa ng kung ano-ano. magkaproblema pa si esmi sa mga decorasyon na yan! ;P

              • Parekoy says:

                @Diwata

                Pangalan mo palang talagang para kang isang mahiwaga.

                Dahil sa hula mo, kinuha ko ang ruler agad at sinukat, 5 pulgada nga! Wow Syet! Galing ng ESP mo.

                Mamaya pag natapos na maligo na si Misis, papahaplos ko sa kanya at sukatinnamin pag nabuhay na, kanina kasi luntoy pa at kulobot na maigi, malamig pa aircon, at yung mga kulugong esmeralda ay nagku-kumpol-kumpol.

                Siguro, hindi pa tayo properly introduced, ang aking nga palang middlename ay Caballo (Kabayo ang pagbigkas sa espanyol, mga ninuno namin sa Lipa, yung nanay ng Lola ko sa tuhod ay naanakan ng isang Kastila na ang tatay ay angkan ng mga manlulupig na Arabo sa Granada, Spain.

                Diwata, ang manghuhula ng haba ng sandata. Bow!

          • 7.1.1.1.2
            Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

            HA! HA! HA! Ha! I always get a pat down after x-ray at the airport because of my bulging in-betweens.

            • Parekoy says:

              @Pacifico

              Putsa, tol, mahirap yan. Patingin ka sa doctor, baka Hydrocephalus yan. Syet…dami mo ng sakit.

              Pray kita tol…

              • macspeed says:

                @parekoy

                he he he he sabog ang uhog ko at luga pati tinae ko lumabas hayyy

                he he he puyat na naman ako nito he he he

              • moonie says:

                parekoy, you are aware that hydrocephalus pertains to the skull, not down below. the brain being full of cerebrospinal fluid, the skull is enlarged.

                do you mean hydrocele of the testis?

              • Parekoy says:

                @moonie

                Aware ako don. ‘pat down’ para leading at nagyayabang kasi Pacifico na malaki yung etets nya, pero freudian slip yung ‘bulging in-betweens’ dahil yung in-between can be his ears., he was also trying to imply that he is brainy.

                You picture him with his big head full of fluids, and then remember his idiotic canned rehashed rants; it will alter your preconception of him. Suddenly, you feel compassion for the poor guy. He just wants to belong, he just wants a little attention, and I think we are compassionate and generous enough to oblige.

                kawawa naman. atin atin na lang ito, baka pag narinig nya magtampo sya, sensitive sya…

            • moonie says:

              poor MRP got patted often at airports, he should not be smuggling eggplants in his pants.

            • Parekoy says:

              @moonie

              I was also planning to pun the word but decided not to to let the reader explore other meanings.

              Could have made it as HydrocePHALLUS, which could create a more vivid imagery, and also added some leaks and stains with puss-like substance on his pants at the fly area and lo! Pacifico will be a certified Venereal Disease carrier! I decided not to, he has too many issues already. :-)

        • 7.1.1.2
          macspeed says:

          ha ha ha ha ha i am really shocked he he he

          how did Raissa handle this? Baka natawa rin sya secretly he he he he

      • 7.1.2
        baycas says:

        Sshh…

        Will do it hush-hush…

    • 7.2
      Alan says:

      HAHAHAHA

    • 7.3
      baycas says:

      :lol:

    • 7.4
      pinay710 says:

      @parekoy, hahaahhaahah talaga naman pagka ganito ang usapan lumalabas ang pagka PILIPINO na magaling sa usapang kalye. hehehhehehe kayo talaga oo nakakaaliw. kaya nga ba ang PILIPINO kahit daming problema magaling magdala. YAN ANG PILIPINO MAGALING MAGDALA NG SULIRANIN. MABUHAY KAYO MGA PINOY!! mapa legal, mapa kaberdehan ok na ok kayo. nakakawala kayo ng problema talaga. salamat sa mga impormasyon. sa edad kong ito bago sa akin ito. parekoy, kabayan kung nasa america ang kaibigan mo sabihin mo meron sa flyer ng DR LEONARDS ang mga ganung gadget.

      • 7.4.1
        Parekoy says:

        @pinay710

        (bulong mode ho ito…)

        May nagpapatanong lang ho

        Baka daw ho pwedeng makuha yung personal na rekomendasyon nyo sa mga gadgets don sa DR Leonards. Kumusta naman daw po, naaliw din ho ba kayo? May bulutong din ho ba yong paborito nyo?

        Napatanong lang talaga po ito ng kaibigan ko at hindi po talaga para sa akin ito…

        Sa atin-atin na lang ho ito, hindi naman ho tayo naririnig ng ibang commenters dito. Hiyang-hiya nga po ako sainyo…

        • 7.4.1.1
          pinay710 says:

          (bulong mode din ito ha0 @ hoy parekoy wala ako nyan. hindi na kami gumagamit nyan.nakalipas na yan. dagdag gastos lang yan. heheheh kayo na lang kabataan ang gumamit nyan. baka maospital lang kami hehehheeh wala kaming insurance kabayan. laking kahihyaan sa mga apo namin hehehehehhehe ikaw talaga oo!!

          • 7.4.1.1.1
            pinay710 says:

            ay ano ba yan, napahalo tuloy ako sa kalokohan nyo. aba eh seryosong usapan itong cyber adultery. balik na kayo sa batas na pinaguusapan. hehehheheeh baka malingatan na naman tyo eh may MAISINGIT na naman na mas grabe. hala kayo!!

          • 7.4.1.1.2
            macspeed says:

            ha ha ha ha ha di na yata ako makakapag aral ng gawain ko bukas hayyyyy he he he he

    • 7.5
      jeproks2002 says:

      @parekoy
      there’s another way to achieve the objective without the bolitas. it works well if you (or your friend) are keloidal or develop hypertrophic scars. all you have to do is get a blade and make some cuts on your thing. as soon as these heal you will have an ampalaya like ding dong instead of a mere “eggplant”.
      there’s one problem though. be sure not to engage in any activity that will cause blood to rush to this area when the scabs begin to develop. as you very well know, when this part “expands” the scabs expands too and well it may not be a very pleasant experience.

      • 7.5.1
        Parekoy says:

        @jeproks2002

        You are correct, that is another way.

        It reminds me of my high school classmate, his family is well off and his uncle is a doctor. His uncle did the circumcision, made three slits, folded the skin and sutured. Later, my relative who became his wife complained to my wife that those scabs were really sharp and no longer pleasurable but a bane. So I showed him my jade “ballections” and he had his dick operated to take out the scabs and inserted some balls too. After that my relative never complained and thank my wife for sharing our secret.

  34. 6
    baycas says:

    Wanted: operational definitions of “cyber sexual intercourse” and “cyber carnal knowledge”, essential elements of “cyber adultery”

    Some lawmakers will have a field day with this…

    However, rough sailing may happen…as regards the SSS, it took awhile before the senators agreed…imagine the discussion of how SSS is accomplished…

    Again, some lawmakers will have a field day with this…

    • 6.1
      raissa says:

      Araguy.

    • 6.2
      baycas says:

      Missed out a word…that will be “field day”.

    • 6.3
      Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

      Before cyberadultery happens there has to be cybermarriage with cybercontract and cybersex.

      Factutom probandum pablum cereal

      • 6.3.1
        macspeed says:

        he he he your back he he he welcome, you are cultural shocking me again he he he or i mean us he he he the CPM’s

      • 6.3.2
        tristanism says:

        That is actually funny. Good one. :)

      • 6.3.3
        clementejak says:

        Not so; Adultery has been in existence since biblical times. In the Ten Commandments No. 7 is “Thou shalt not commit adultery.

        In Mathew 5:28; “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart”.

        Sex always comes first before marriage. In legal parlance, marriage is necessity before an adultery can be charge.

      • 6.3.4
        moonie says:

        gee, does this means well have computers marrying computers? with ISPs providing ceremonies. many will object to this! what if the computers are gay? or lesbians?

    • 6.4
      macspeed says:

      @baycas, day by day, my cultural shocked (CS) is synchronizing with the trend he he he initially, i dont know what is CPM he he he language barrier sign of CS, then i read lots of CPM’s comments, wowwwww he he he CS again he he he but i like it he he he

      i will wait what the Law dudes defines those he he he

      • 6.4.1
        baycas says:

        Try reading past Raissa Robles’s blog posts. You will note that there is really nothing to be shocked about culturally…

        Unless, you already became a coconut…brown on the outside, white on the inside!

        That is when a condescending nature towards countrymen will exist.

  35. 5
    Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

    Sex is not sex without penetration. Oral sex (ewwww !!!! clinically unsanitary, absolutely not hygeinic. I NEVER DO THAT!!! Eoooowwwwww !!!!) is not considered sex.

    There is precedence: Bill and Monica

    Bill did not peentrate Monica with his organ. He did penetrate her with Cuban Cigar but under their law it is not sex. She did went down on him. He squirted her face and into heer blue dress BUT IT WAS NOT SEX.

    SEX IS PENETRATION OF VAGINA WITH THE PENIS !!!!!

    Ewwww !!!!! In my world, children are still delivered by Storck or FedExed 24-hour delivery.

    • 5.1
      raissa says:

      But RM said it can be any object

    • 5.2
      Parekoy says:

      @Pacifico

      Welcome back!

      For the past 48 hours, I was worried that something bad happened to you. I’m truly glad that you are still here.

      Just a friendly reminder to take your medications regularly :-)

      • 5.2.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        @Parekoy, my friend, thank you for missing me. I am sooo busy with the inaugration of Barack … I’ll be in and out but will not be posting as frequently as I should …

        Parekoy, take care of the house ….. while I am not around ….

      • 5.2.2
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        @Parekoy, since you are expert on Tagalog, Barack asked me what is the english translation of “PANG-ILAN PRESIDENTE SI BARACK OBAMA?”

        How many is Barack Obama as President?

        • 5.2.2.1
          Parekoy says:

          @Pacifico

          Binigyan mo pa ako ng trabaho, hirap naman yan, pero kung bibigyan mo ako ng tiket sa inaguaration, eh start na.

          Hwag kalimutan yung medication.

      • 5.2.3
        baycas says:

        This blog is his therapy…

        The psychotherapy I was referring in a previous thread.

    • 5.3
      macspeed says:

      MRP or RPM he he he i like RPM is is speed he he he anything related to speed is my liking he he he later i will tell everyone why he he he for now i dont want to miss a thing here….

      he he he he i can see, you dont like eating peanuts he he he that is not delicious he he he, but the fluid is fountain of youth….

      he he he CS again

    • 5.4
      clementejak says:

      True enough, as Bill Clinton has said, ” I did not have sex with that woman” and he was acquitted.

      That is the reason why oral sex is clearly defined.

    • 5.5
      Diwata says:

      bakla ka ba?

  36. 4
    • 4.1
      macspeed says:

      @baycas, this is it? he he he grabee na technology, dati napila pa ako 4am in the morning with a bag of 1 saudi riyal bago ko makausap kumander ko, ubos isang bag na 1 SR he he he, now is is so Cultural Shocking again he he he he what an invention….it was a modified vibrator adopting the control circuit of microprocessor and sensors he he he plus the sim card insertion to earn for provider or it maybe wi-fi without sim card he he he but one needs subscription, with these network, the sensors transmit the signals, the paired device abroad connected to the net as well wi-fi or what ever gets the partner reactions he he he

      lumawak na yun Newtons law naging cyber na, for every action, there is always an opposite equal reaction he he he via cyber space he he he

      • 4.1.1
        baycas says:

        As I have written, weak or bad signal will be a problem for remote cyber sex.

        Smart phones with multiple, simultaneously active SIM cards must be the platform for this Bluetooth device (sex toy).

        • 4.1.1.1
          Melinda says:

          aysus! the real one is still preferred. No thanks!

        • 4.1.1.2
          leona says:

          …since gratification is the only essential, buy 2: Zeus & Hera – if U are Zeus put Hera infront of you, or if U are Hera put Zeus infront of U; switch ON, internet is STRONG, no problema! Forget cyberspace! @Macspeed, you can bring this to the desert and enjoy without Internet! hehehe cultural shock ka na naman…

  37. 3
    Rax says:

    Here’s one from The Big Bang Theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ35e8VEwMk

    • 3.1
      Parekoy says:

      Like that show. Can appreciate more if one has Math and Science backgrounds.

      • 3.1.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        You cannot have science without Math. Because math is the language of science.

        • 3.1.1.1
          moonie says:

          science as in medical science uses universal language, uniformly a dead language. often of greek or hebrew origin. medical terms are sometimes hard to understand for the uninitiated. I doubt if being doctor of medicine makes one a mathematician. at school, science and math are two different subjects.

  38. 2
    netty says:

    What can you say Rm { jk } Revibration Mode? I love love the exchange of repartee here for this penetrates my grey matter, you know, especially on the days when my senior moments are attacking me. Brilliant source of information this blog that I put it in the highest recommended reads of my day while drinking my Tassimo espresso. AHHH,deeper, deeper, more, more blogs please.Excuse my dust ;)

  39. 1
    X says:

    In the bible, just lusting for another is already having sex…

    • 1.1
      praetorius says:

      “mind sex”

    • 1.2
      Johnny Lin says:

      In the Bill version of the Bible, oral sex is not sex per se and everything depends on what the word “is” means

      The rest is american history!

      Another american historical fact:

      By the current definition of cyber adultery, (hand is a form of penetrating object) married american GIs have all committed adultery with the likes of Bardot, Raquel, Ursula, Sophia, Liz, Jane, Mae and Zsa zsa. Some new names are JLo, Coco, Jen, Kate, Christy and Heidi

      Joe Am, was your paramour in the list? Or Natalie was your type?
      He he he

      • 1.2.1
        Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Amen to you @Johnny. Please take time to read my above lucid, logical sans graphic comment above.

        Let me tell you a story why we are here in this world.

        God created Adam and Eve. He told Adam and Eve to go out and multiply. Despite their being naked, virgin and Brad Pittish like, they did not multiply.

        God is frustrated. God is lonely. He asked Satan. Satan said there is mathematical solution to the problem so there will be exponentially many children romping around drive-by-shooting …

        Satan said to God, “we are in the garden of Eden represented by “E”. You want to to Multiply represented by “X”. What is missing is “S”. So to complete the equation S + E + X = Children ”

        God asked Satan how are they going to do that? What does it take?

        So, Satan called Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs planted Apple. The REST IS HIS STORY.

        Apple is now eaten all over the world. “An Apple a Day Keeps Doctors Away”.

        God asked why does Apple keeps the doctor away?

        Steve Jobs said, “Sex releases endorphin that makes people happy. Happy people are not prone to illness”

        THERE YOU ARE FOLKS !!!! My Story of SEX not HIS STORY.

        • 1.2.1.1
          macspeed says:

          he he he these waves delivers cultural shocked to CPM who cant handle these sort of words he he he dumadami na ang mga nalilito, ay ano ba yun? Ano ba ibig sabihin nun? he he he

          when one migrated, one becomes sick with Cultural shock from the inhabitants, the place, the technologies etc etc he he he

          twisting this thought, if one immigrant comes in, the inhabitants suffers the cultural shock instead, the place has become his place he he he and similarly everyone understand each other he he he

          • 1.2.1.1.1
            Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

            It is CULTURALLY SHOCKING !!!! Absolutely !!!!

            BASTA SEX ANG PINAG-USAPAN Magkaka-isa ang bayan !!!!

            • Alan says:

              You can’t seem to grasp or understand the power of sex.Just think of what you feel towards Ignacio

              • moonie says:

                I think he got mixed up with his landmarks. endorphins are chemicals found in the brain, not down below where sex organs are. sex releases sperms that make babies, accident or not. many things can be gotten from sex, eg, herpes, genital warts, AIDS too. not a happy occassion then.

  40. begalon says:

    I am unsually conservative who believes that ADULTERY, never mind CYBER ADULTERY is a physical sexual act or contact between married people. Doesnt matter if there is a penetration or not once they are engage in any form of sexual act they are commiting adultery. If Cyber adultery exists, then a sexual fantasy is adulterous.

  41. baycas says:

    Ang nakaraan…

    http://www.interaksyon.com/infotech/cybercrime/top-ten-questions-by-sc-justices-on-the-cybercrime-law

    Abangan sa ika-22 ng Enero ang ikalawang yugto. Ang SolGen ang itatanghal…

  42. joedelacruise says:

    Good day, @Baycas.

    Thank you so much for your invitation at No. 29.1. But I have to submit, Your Honor, that I find your checklist to be a bit vague. As an example, if I put “2” in the box for “Chance of being hurt or killed”, would it mean lesser, even, or greater chance of being hurt or killed, and on what grounds/principle?

    And I’m also sorry not to be able to comment on something that is “still-to-be-defined-but-actually-happening cyber adultery”.

    • baycas says:

      Possible consequences in Adulterous Sex WITH Contact:

      Pleasure, check
      Mental problems (e.g., guilt, depression, delusion), check
      Sexually transmitted infections, check
      Marital problems, check
      Lives of children greatly affected, check
      Pregnancy, check
      Chance of being blackmailed, check
      Chance of being ostracized by the community, check
      Chance of being hurt or killed, check

      Possible consequences in Adulterous Sex WITHOUT Contact:

      Pleasure, check
      Mental problems (e.g., guilt, depression, delusion), check
      Sexually transmitted infections, Not applicable
      Marital problems, check
      Lives of children greatly affected, check
      Pregnancy, Not applicable
      Chance of being blackmailed, check
      Chance of being ostracized by the community, check
      Chance of being hurt or killed, check

      • baycas says:

        @joedelacruise,

        They are both in existence. The former is already a criminal act. The latter may not pass the standard of being a crime.

        However, their consequences are almost the same.

        Must the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 be made to prevent Case No. 2 or must the State totally/completely ignore the existence of Case No. 2?

      • Baltazar says:

        Katoto,

        Pregnancy, Not applicable

        How about a mail-to-order sperm in the future? Probably packed in a dry ice preserved styro , in a pressure-packed Hera-ready cartridge fitted with some sensors to detect the contraction in the female internals which characterizes the Big O. Timed release such that in the middle of the Big O, the contents that has been pre heated already to the body temperature will be spewed out. ;-)

  43. focusonmayelections says:

    my comment is off topic but i am reading and left about bishops and priests directing their energy at encouraging their flock not to elect candidates who voted for the rh bill.
    the latest is of course the latest tirade from archbishop arguelles. heartwarming however is the fact that influential persons (fr bernas, ernesto pernia of u.p.) as well as ordinary persons (the latest being an the letter to the editor page of inquirer today) are also writing persuasive arguments urging the church officials to desist from what they are doing.

    isn’t it time for our popular cardinal tagle to step in and awaken his priests to the likelihood that the catholic church in the philippines will be abandoned by its educated flock. or is that the motivation behind the anti-rh stand of politicians and church officials- keep them many, keep them poor, keep them uneducated so it will be easier to threaten/manipulate/intimidate them?

    it behooves us to focus our attention on the may elections. electioneering has started. there are so many we need to awaken to the issues raised above.

    • focusonmayelections says:

      correction: first line should red ‘reading right and left about…..”. third line second paragraph should read ” (the latest being one in the letter to the editor page page)”.

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        THIS COMING ELECTION will be a vote of confidence of the church !!!

        Bantay kayo mga walang hiya na mga pari . We will vote for those who were in favor of RHBill.

        DOWN WITH THE CHURCH !!!! You have oppressed the Filipino minds for a long long time.

    • Parekoy says:

      @f

      Let them do what they perceive/believe is right for the interest of the church, that is their job.

      There is a glimmer of hope that even the poor knows how to count with their fingers and toes. If contraceptives are available/accessible to them, then they instinctively use them.

      Couples basic needs are: food, shelter, and sex.

      Food-the destitute to survive reluctantly became subhuman just to fill their stomachs with ‘Pagapag’.

      Shelter-the homeless actually has plenty of free choices: under the bridge, a makeshift kariton, or even the sidewalks, and many more unoccupied nooks.

      Sex- basically a need and the cheapest form of entertainment, but the consequence is opposite. With contraceptives, the dire consequence is reduced.

      Four hundred years as our provider of unsolicited guidance and wisdom on our reproductive choices has been a failure. Even the uneducated and the maleducated meek has doubts when suffering presently in hell.

      So let the priests, the annointed saviors of our souls, let them, let them, for their influence among the majority of the flock will wane.

  44. baycas says:

    FIRE!

    I understand sex with or without contact outside the contract (marriage, that is) is like playing with fire.

    “If you play with fire you are likely to get burnt”, they say.

    In relation to RA 10175 (AN ACT DEFINING CYBERCRIME, PROVIDING FOR THE PREVENTION, INVESTIGATION, SUPPRESSION AND THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES)…

    SEC. 6. All crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the use of information and communications technologies shall be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, as the case may be.

    Cyber Arson now exists, well, once AADCPFTPISATIOPTAFOP is already imposable.

    —–
    Note: As I can see that five (5) per cent are already BORED at the time of this posting, I believe “fire” can elicit readers’ attention same as “sex”. Hope this “Fire!” works on those who are bored.

    • Parekoy says:

      @Baycas

      You have the right of free speech, but with some limitations.

      Shouting FIRE inside a Cyber Theater or Cyber Cinema can put you in trouble!

      Most of us here, while watching YouTube movies (I swear, I was not watching that porn… Really!…) panicked, ran out from my house naked, when you shouted FIRE!.

      Luckily, it was false alarm, otherwise I could have saved only a bottle of Jergens and a box of tissues.

      I might sue you… :-)

    • leona says:

      There is this FIRE! the cop shouted and ‘landed’ in a hospital, hand [not burned] ‘shot’ kuno – he’s lying on bed and not on a wheel chair

      “Single shot from 1st SUV

      “When they refused to go down, the soldiers retreated to the line of soldiers and policemen and then a man in civilian clothes leading the group shouted, ‘Fire,’” De Lima said.

      Policemen and soldiers peppered the first vehicle with bullets.

      De Lima said that according to the witnesses, a single shot was fired from inside the first vehicle.

      “The witnesses said they even saw the [spent case fly] out the window from the driver’s side of the first vehicle. “Then it was followed by another order to fire from the same person in civilian clothes at the checkpoint,” she said.

      De Lima said the first burst of gunfire lasted about 20 seconds and the second, about eight seconds.

      Then from the second vehicle, she said, Lontok and another man stepped out, their hands raised.

      But “a uniformed soldier with a rifle and a civilian with a handgun” shot the two men, De Lima said.

      She said Lontok’s body was found in a roadside ditch, where it rolled after the environmentalist was shot.

      Police records showed Lontok was hit 14 times. He took one shot to the head, one to the throat, one to the chest, two to the back, and nine to the legs. ”

      What are the chances now of ordinary innocent travelers on highways in the country approaching check or KILLING POINTS manned by cops in civilian clothes and soldiers in full battle gear? ZERO!

      FIRE! And gov’t keeps saying “This will [not] happen again.” It keeps on happening. The roles of our PNP cops now are now different: To Protect Themselves and to KILL the others!

      This is off topic but FIRE! is not. Getting back that bored 5%?… @@baycas & Parekoy….

  45. Parekoy says:

    With passing of the RH Law, the next logical step is Divorce Law!

    If congress proposes a Divorce Bill, then adultery laws will be reviewed to harmonize the intents of the Family Code.

    Most likely the proponents of Divorce Bill are also going to push for the elimination of Adultery or lessening the punishment regarding Adultery. Adultery will just be treated as a strong example of infidelity, which will be one of the grounds for divorce. Spousal abuse, rape, neglect, insanity, or even irreconcilable differences can be grounds for divorce. Alimony and child support will of course be the consequence. Alimony could be conditional, like if the party who was guilty of adultery or concubinage will not be entitled to received any amount, there might be even some monetary award for the aggrieved.

    Adultery can also be harmonized wth Cybercrime Law, and congress will review and decide the definition of cyber sex.

    If the above are accomplished, then I can commend the law of representatives, for once, did their jobs.

    The Philippine Constitution is a living document, it should go with the need of the times! It should grow its backbone and divorce itself from the dominant influence of the Catholic church and it should be true to the needs of its citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs.

    • Parekoy says:

      Calling on Bar Reviewees!

      You can hone your debating skills here, educate us, at the same time have fun.

      I suggest you can have a handle like, PLM001, Arneo001, UP001, Bedan001, etc, for obvious affiliation.

      Shout out to PLM debaters for defeating Ateneo Law about the firecrackers issue!

    • leona says:

      Again! Lawmerriers gonna pass another important bill – DIVORCE? Same style – no study, no consultation, no enough time, YES hurriedly!

      We don’t trust ‘em anymore! They have the vote numbers of defective bills passed, the trend now.

      We’re being fooled and mistreated by them. Politics are mixed with personal gains at our expense. We should see to it that some of our lawmerriers be out of office to recoup the integrity and credibility of lawmaking in Congress.

      Imagine even people’s money are mistreated as GIFTS these days! to lawmerriers. Broaday lights no shame while many people, like in the South, are in so much dire need of HELP.

      Disgusting situation!

      • leona says:

        Senator vs Senator vs Senator…! pera perahan palagi! Read this link

        “nterAksyon.com
        The online news portal of TV5

        MANILA, Philippines – Claiming that a colleague in the Senate is using government funds for personal expenses, Sen. Panfilo Lacson on Thursday urged the Commission on Audit to examine how senators disburse money from their regular and additional maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE).

        “The desired end state of my proposal is to file graft charges against the senator concerned if the evidence warrants,” said Lacson in a text message to reporters.

        The legislator allegedly uses MOOE to pay for the salaries of maids, buy groceries for the family, as well as pay for the rent of a satellite office within a property that the lawmaker owns, according to Lacson, adding that thdetails about his colleague’s expenses are documented and are “in the records of the Senate.”

        “All I can say is, isang senador lang ‘yong mga maids sa bahay sa Senate naka-payroll, ‘yong asawa, may grocery allowance sa Senate at ‘yong satellite office rental, sarili niyang property,” said Lacson in a separate radio interview Thursday.

        Earlier, Lacson engaged in verbal tussle with Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago calling the latter a “crusading crook.” Santiago also called Lacson the attack dog of Senate president Juan Ponce Enrile, who gave 18 senators P1.6 million each last year for their additional MOOE.

        Last week, Santiago also called on the COA to examine and reveal to the public the “so-called savings”of the heads of the Senate, the House of Representatives, and other goverenment agencies.

        Santiago said the COA audit would ensure “transparency” on how leaders of Congress and other heads of public offices use their “enforced savings,” which she called “the grandmama of all scandals.”

        Tama yun MRP sa ibang mga sulat nya! Early to fight early to bite! Elections coming unclean & bright! Look to your right…ekk! Look to your left…ekkk uli ! What’s happening to our senate, Mr. congressman?

        • leona says:

          They do pray for one another. But during fighting, in words naman, can we say one or both abandons or forgets the prayers?…

          “Chuanico said that the bursting of Santiago’s eye blood vessels was a definite warning sign that she is at risk of a stroke.

          “Technically, Sen. Santiago suffered a mild stroke after her television interview. Fortunately, the stroke went to her eye instead of her brain. If she continues as usual, a second stroke will be imminent,” Chuanico said.

          Enrile said that he would pray for the recovery of Santiago.

          “I am saddened by what happened to her. I’m sorry that she has to suffer that kind of pressure so I will pray for her recovery,” Enrile said. – With Marvin Sy”

          We don’t know…

      • clementejak says:

        Philippines is the only country in this world that do not have divorce law. What is the need to study and consult whom?

        The simplest reason for divorce is “irreconcilable differences” if either of the party refuses to reconcile then that is acceptable ground.

  46. Rudy Portugal says:

    I had a good laugh!

  47. pinay710 says:

    sigurado walang absent sa senado sa usaping cybersex. lahat kukuha ng kalutasan sa kanilang mga problema sa sexlife nila kasi halos LAHAT ng andun puro adulterer. cyberlibel ba ito komento ko? wala akong sinabing pangalan ha. pero totoo ito.

  48. manuelbuencamino says:

    RM can use his computer to activate remotely a devise that will insert itself in a woman’s vagina – a drone vibrator – and carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse na yun per the definition provided by RM.

    There is also an audio of the arguments in the SC re cybercrime. If RM listens to it he will find that an i-phone is considered among the gadgets covered by the cybercrime law, So his Iphone inside his kulasisi’s vagina is cyberadultery. Based on RM’s definition of carnal knowledge and the cybercrime law’s list of gadgets.

    • RM says:

      I beg your indulgence, your honor, but I do not think we really have to go that far in understanding the language of a law. We are under no obligation to lose our common sense.

      • manuelbuencamino says:

        Just quoting your definition and the cybercrime law, atorni. If there is no common sense in yours and the cybercrime law’s definitions then don’t lay the absence of it on my door.

        • manuelbuencamino says:

          Plus what is very clearly spelled out in black and white needs no interpretation. That’s common sense.

          • RM says:

            alright. alright.

          • RM says:

            I will have to agree with you Mr. Buencamino… As a matter of fact, we need creative and imaginative people like you in the practice… it’s good that there are people who could think outside of the box… Judges will be much more interested to conduct hearings knowing that a litigant like will appear in court… They will be totally amused by you… and by no means i say that in a sarcastic sense but really you, mister, are amazing… I hope I could meet you in person and shake your hand… =)

      • moonie says:

        yay! RM is lawyer? and he’s hiding under the handle of RM as in room? motel room? that says much about him. I think he’s pseudo lawyer, probably not registered, has not passed bar exam therefore, hides under RM. I think he’s a scammer pretending to be expert.

        • RM says:

          Hmmm… maybe… maybe not… oh btw, i didn’t know that there’s an internet access in the moon… moonie… =)

        • Victin Luz says:

          @moonie…whatever @RM commented I think it was good, interesting and educational topic for us non-lawyers. And besides with the fasttracking of the most advance computer/cyber TECHNOLOGIES ,,, maybe few decades from now TELEFORTATION will come into existence.

        • Baltazar says:

          @moonie
          honk…honk…oops! blow your horn or you might hit somebody.

  49. baycas says:

    Checklist

    (__) Pleasure
    (__) Mental problems (e.g., guilt, depression, delusion)
    (__) Sexually transmitted infections
    (__) Marital problems
    (__) Lives of children greatly affected
    (__) Pregnancy
    (__) Chance of being blackmailed
    (__) Chance of being ostracized by the community
    (__) Chance of being hurt or killed

    Identify which one to check in the following cases:

    1. Adulterous sex WITH contact
    2. Adulterous sex WITHOUT contact

    • pinay710 says:

      sir baycas, sa palagay ko yung dalawang kaso ay parehong pakikiapid,2 lang dun sa listahan ang hindi magiging resulta ng WITHOUT contact. pero ganun din yun PAKIKIAPID PA DIN YUN. kasi ang usapan dito CONTACT ng ari ng babae at ari ng lalake na pumapasok sa ari ng babae. pero nagco contact pa din ang ang ibang bahagi ng katawan nila maliban sa pagpasok ng ari ng lalake sa ari ng babae KAYA PAKIKIAPID PA DIN. pareho lang po yan.

      • baycas says:

        Thanks, @pinay, for your analysis.

        CPM is much more far advance than the Senate and Lower House!

        - leona

        I like @leona’s characterization of this blog as Court of Public & My opinion.

        I would like to invite @RM and @joedelacruise to comment on the checklist I posted above on the consequences of the RPC-defined adultery and the still-to-be-defined-but-actually-happening cyber adultery.

        The ease by which cyber adultery can be accomplished and perpetuated with almost the same effect as adultery (sans the consequences of STI and pregnancy) if caught and the relative difficulty of proving such wrongdoing may already justify the one-degree higher penalty that the Cybercrime Prevention Act laid down in its Sec. 6.

  50. leona says:

    Not cyberadultery but airport adulterated water bottle…click link…Don’t receive from someone any bottled water at airports – could contain drugs, etc. Sorry off topic but good for all!

    https://www.facebook.com/ajax/sharer/?s=11&appid=2392950137&p=10151155985775848

  51. leona says:

    Q. A married woman became pregnant. No sexual intercourse took place. Possible? Why not. Through A.I. = artificial insemination. Raissa’s initial reply to RM that the latter is looking at the prism of law of the past, etc. is loaded. To support that, here is an “Introduction” of the same, the link ‘

    “A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE ON ARTIFICIAL
    INSEMINATION
    INTRODUCTION
    DoMINGO G. CASTILLO
    AUGUSTO Y. HONG
    LORNA T. PATAJO-!CAPUNAN *
    LEMUEL M. SANTOS
    ROMEO R. STO. TOMAS
    Medical science is continually discovering new methods and techniques.
    Legal rules do not generally anticipate scientific developments. Courts of
    law are thus often confronted with factual situations for which no definite
    legal rules apply. The problem is based primarily in a legal system which
    draws from rule& and regulations formulated at a time when future developments
    in science were not and could not have been fore.,een. Inconsistencies
    therefore result when the courts attempt to fit scientific achievements to
    a legal framework which, being outmoded, cannot help but be unresponsive
    to the current needs of society arising from medical a’1d technological
    advances.
    One such medical discovery is artificial insemination.”

    More from this I will try to put here. The discussion is so interesting so far.

    Can the same married woman who became pregnant via A.I. be considered as having committed adultery? Actual case will follow here.

    • leona says:

      The coming example of an actual case, though not yet related to re cyberspace of internet adultery but again, can be very possible. I will not give more personal comments except extracting them and placing it here for CPMers to consider it’s worth. Here is the actual case, [ the final link will finally end this ] –

      “A) The Marital Relationship -
      1. Adultery-
      Does a female who consents to A.I.D. commit adultery? In this
      jurisdiction a0ultery is a criminal act and “is committed by any married
      woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband
      and 1:-y the man who has carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be
      married, even if the marriage be subsequently void. “12 From this provision
      it can be gathered that sexual intercourse is an essential element of the
      crime of adultery. Sexual intercourse is a physical act which involves
      penetration of a female by a male. Accordingly, it would appear that
      artificial insemination should not constitute adultery since there is no sexual
      act of penetration.
      Actually, there are two conflicting theories on the nature of the crime
      of adultery. One, that adultery is necessarily and can only be committed
      by actual contact of sex organs, and the other, that the true essence of
      the crime is voluntary surrender of reproductive organs facilitating the introduction
      of spurious heirs into the family.13 The latter which obviates
      12 REv. PEN. COOE, art. 333.
      13 Perello & Salvador, Legal Aspects of. Artificial Insemmation in the Plzilippine
      Laws, 6 FAR EAST L. REv. 47 (1958) .
      146 PHILIPPINE LAW JOURNAL [VOL. 51
      the actual contact of sex organs was espoused in the case of Oxford v.
      Ox/ord.H

      The Oxfords had been married in Canada in 1913 and honeymooned
      in ‘ England. The marriage w~ !:~ver consummated due to the great pain
      that attempts at intercourse caused the bride. Mr. Oxford returned to
      Canada alone, his wife remaining in England for six years until 1919 when
      ~he also returned. In the interlude she had given birth to a child as a
      result of A.I.D. administered, allegedly, as a “medical cure” to enable
      her to enjoy normal sexual relations with her husband. When Mr. Oxford
      refused to receive her, she filed the suit for alimony.
      The court rejected the “therapeutic” argument and held that she had
      committed adultery. It held that impregnation per se is tbe test of adultery
      and that sexual union of the bodies or moral turpitude is of no consequence.
      The discussion of A.I.D. in Oxford is dictum since the Court
      disbelieved that the child was born as a result of A.I.D., basing its actual
      decision on a finding that it was the offspring of an adulterous relationship
      with another man.loS”

      • leona says:

        This is a Phil case of adultery. We’re not yet into cyberspace in this case. But we will.

        “Whether artificial insemination constitutes sexual intercourse and is
        thus within the contemplation of Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code
        is yet a matter to be decided locally. The possibility, however, of it falling
        within the &tatutory purview is quite remote, since in our jurisdiction
        all criminal cases requiring sexual intercourse as an essential element as in
        rape, seduction, abduction, have all involved physical contact of the actors
        and courts in all these cases assumed and looked upon sexual intercourse
        as “an actual contact of the sex organs of a man and woman and the actual
        penetration of the body of the latter.”21

        In the ca3e of U.S. v. Mata/2 however, our Supreme Court stated
        in a dictum that “the gist of the crime of adultery under the Spanish law,
        as under the common law in force in England and· the United States in
        the absence of statutory enactments, is the danger 0f introducing spurious
        heirs into the family, whereby the rights of the real heirs may be impaired
        and a man may be charged with the maintenance of a family not his own.”
        In tUs case Jacinta Mata, the defendant, and Marcial Tanedo Liu Chiu
        were married. The former had alleged carnal relations with the codefendant
        Quiterio Sarmiento. The · Court convicted them of the crime
        of adultery then defined by Article 433 of the Old Penal Code as “committed
        by the married woman who lies with a man not her husband and
        by him who lies with her knowing that she is married, although the marriage
        be afterwards declared void.”

        It should be noted that this case was decided under the Penal Code
        of 1870. From the peculiar phrasing of the provision the lawmakers intended
        to declare adulterous the infidelity of a married woman to her
        marital vows. Our Revised Penal Code precisely changed the wording of
        this provision and used the term sexual intercourse implying therefore that
        not any mere act of infidelity can be held to be adultery.

        Besides, the U.S. v. Mata case was decided without awareness of artificial insemination and therefore cannot be used as authority for determining whether artificial insemination is adultery under Philippine laws.
        \YJe feel that there is an obvious difference between A.I.D. and the
        clandestine physical relationship which usually accompanies adultery. The
        21 Perello & Salvador, op. cit., supra, note 13 af 48.
        22 18 Phil. 490 (1911 ) .
        1976] PERSPECTIVE ON ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION 149
        moral turpitude incident to an illicit sexual affair is simply not present.

        A wife is not being unfaithful to her spouse by attempting artificial impregn1tion.
        In fact she is bolstering another commonly held moral value
        - the stability of the family unit. As of yet, our courts have not been
        faced with a case on A.I. and have had no occasion to rule on this issue.”

        For me, there are enough facts to the above. Add the fact to the above facts that iPad or Samsung/Apple or desktop pc or laptop, via e-mails mainly were used to avail, etc. to have A.I. =artificial insemination, as a consequence impregnated the married woman, no sexual contact with a man was made -

        Is there cybercrime adultery by the married woman under RA 10175? [ not totally on the topic here - Or adultery under the Rev Penal Code only?]

          • raissa says:

            Thanks for this.

          • RM says:

            as to the possibility of pregnancy with the use of artificial insemination, i have to concur with that. but as to the possibility that the courts will affirm the conviction of adultery based on artificial insemination is, in my humble opinion, remote. To undergo artificial insemination is not the same as having sexual intercourse. surely, they may produce the same results but it does not really concern the courts because insofar as they are concerned the only issue to be resolved in the adultery case, assuming the wife is married, is whether or not she had sexual intercourse with anybody other than her husband.

            I must admit I may have been inaccurate in my earlier comments about the insertion of an object in the vagina as part of the definition of sexual intercourse. i must have been referring to the sexual assault provision in rape and whoever pointed it out, thank you so much. However, i believe that even if there was no penetration of the penis, that what the husband actually witnessed was only say, a dildo being inserted by a man other than the husband, i really believe that it is sufficient already as to create a reasonable presumption that they engaged in sexual intercourse as defined under RPC. there are many cases where the SC convicted the wife of adultery based merely on testimonial evidence from some witness that the wife and the man not her husband frequent, say for instance, a lodge or motel or an inn. our SC at times takes judicial notice of the fact that motels here in the Philippines aren’t really what they are supposed to be as a business operation. besides, it all depends on the trial, especially during the cross examination of the witness. the witness may testify on the behavior, emotion, condition, appearance of the wife while entering the lodge with another man. that is why if you don’t have a direct evidence to prove a crime, you would usually be doubling your efforts to look for other relevant circumstantial evidence so as to make a reasonable presumption that there was such sexual intercourse that took place.

            take note that the evidence required in order to sustain a conviction of a criminal offense is “proof beyond reasonable doubt.” that is the highest in the quantum of evidence. If you look at the requirement, you would notice that it does require that there should be no doubt at all as to the commission of the crime. this means that you can convict a person even if there is a doubt, provided that is merely a trivial, irrelevant, flimsy, unreasonable doubt. but if the doubt is something reasonable as when it is not sufficiently proven by evidence, then you have to acquit. good evening everyone.

            • RM says:

              *correction* last paragraph: “xxx you would notice that it does NOT require that xxx” instead of “xxx you would notice that it does require that xxx”

              • leona says:

                @RM…is there any or more correction on this quote – “this means that you can convict a person even if there is a doubt, provided that is merely a trivial, irrelevant, flimsy, unreasonable doubt.” ?

                “Doubt” becomes subjective in determining proof beyond a reasonable doubt per your opn. But what is required ‘are facts’ to conclude proof to convict or acquit the accused. Even ‘circumstantial evidence’ [ as you maintain] ‘goes’ into a ‘picture’ leading or showing ‘the facts’ by ‘imagination’ as the eyewitness or ‘husband’ did not see ‘actually’ the ‘element’ of the crime (Adultery) – actual sexual intercourse or ‘penetration.’ It is only asked “Can the decision-maker put a picture in his/her mind there was sexual intercourse -based on ‘circumstantial evidence’ that point to that imagine ‘fact’?

                The ‘triviality,’ or ‘irrelevancy,’ or ‘flimsiness,’ and ‘unreasonableness’ on ‘doubt’ is not poised on the ‘fact’ whether ‘actual sexual intercourse or penetration’ is the crux of the matter. Those ‘conditonal qualifiers’ do touch on ‘other matters’ of evidence but not whether actual sexual intercourse or penetration did take place or did not take place. Can you please pound more on this. Thanks.

              • RM says:

                @leona… I dont know why I cannot reply to your post below but anyway, I really appreciate your undying enthusiasm in commenting or reacting on my thoughts. I would like to say that you hit the bulls eye, especially in your last paragraph. Now, we’re on the same page. This is your question: “Can the decision-maker put a picture in his/her mind there was sexual intercourse -based on ‘circumstantial evidence’ that point to that imagine ‘fact’?

                Let me answer your question by giving you an example. Say in a crime of homicide as defined under the RPC, the very element that you need to establish above all else, assuming that death of the victim was already established, is that the accused did in fact kill the victim. Absent any evidence to prove the existence of that particular element of the crime will result in the acquittal of the accused or dismissal in his favor. the problem however is that no one ever saw the actual killing of the victim by the accused. does that result in automatic dismissal of the case? of course not. as we have mentioned before, a crime may be established on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Say for instance, a witness testified that the he saw the accused enter the house of the victim at about 12:00 noon. then another witness testified that he was sitting on a gutter near the house of the victim when he heard a gunshot at around 12:05. then another witness testified that he saw the accused got out from the house of the victim at or about 12:08. Then the police testified they arrive at the house of the victim at or about 12:15 and found the body of the victim lying on the floor. that the victim died of a gunshot wound. that the bullet recovered from the crime scene was subjected to a ballistics examination and that the findings show that it came from a firearm owned and duly registered under the name of the accused.

                Take note, no one ever saw the actual killing. no one ever testified that he saw the accused killed the victim. the accused was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of homicide.

                Question: under the circumstances, is there a doubt as to the commission of the offense? the answer is yes. why? because no one ever saw the actual killing hence no one can say for certain that it was the accused who killed the victim. second question: is the doubt concerning the commission of the offense reasonable? of course not. the circumstances, based from all the evidence presented by the prosecution, all point to the very probability that it was the accused who killed the victim. take note that when you say circumstantial evidence, it refers to evidence on collateral maters which may establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. why is it called evidence on collateral matters? because it does not directly prove the fact in issue. what is the fact in issue in this case? whether or not accused killed the victim. To illustrate, the testimony of the witness who saw the accused entered the house of the victim. does that prove the fact in issue? otherwise stated, does that testimony, by itself, prove that the accused killed the victim? of course not. how about the testimony of the other witness that he heard a gunshot. does that mean that the accused killed the victim? of course not. by itself it is not sufficient to convict the accused of the crime charged. what we have here, however, are pieces of evidence which, if taken together, points to the probability that it was in fact the accused who killed the victim and no one else.

                According to SC: Hence, it has been held that a judgment of conviction based on circumstantial evidence can be upheld only if the circumstances proven constitute an unbroken chain leading to one fair and reasonable conclusion, to the exclusion of any other, that the accused is guilty.

                Having said this, i now go back to your question: “Can the decision-maker put a picture in his/her mind there was sexual intercourse -based on ‘circumstantial evidence’ that point to that imagine ‘fact’? Yes. In the first place, there is, as you call it, an imagined fact, like in the situation of the homicide case i mentioned above, because no one ever saw the accused kill the victim. Can the judge put a picture in his/her mind that the killing was done by the accused? Yes, if supported by circumstantial evidence. is there zero doubt that the accused killed the victim? no. there is still doubt. one may infer that the victim merely used the gun of the accused and killed himself. that is a possibility. that is a doubt. but is it a reasonable doubt? it is highly unreasonable because (1) it is not supported by evidence, (2) it easily controverted by the evidence of the prosecution, (3) by using logic and sound reasoning, it is highly improbable that a person will borrow the gun of his intruder and voluntarily kill himself in the presence of his intruder in the absence of any assertion and evidence to that effect. there you have it. proof beyond reasonable doubt. have a nice day.

              • vincent says:

                ” i believe that even if there was no penetration of the penis, that what the husband actually witnessed was only say, a dildo being inserted by a man other than the husband, i really believe that it is sufficient already as to create a reasonable presumption that they engaged in sexual intercourse as defined under RPC.”

                I agree with you, and if anyone insists or is adamant that there is no sexual intercourse until a penis is inserted into a vagina of a woman, but whose clitoris and vulva was/is being licked by the man not the husband of the woman, then let’s make oral sex a trendy diversion for our own sexual satisfaction and not feel guilty about it because we are not comitting adultery, for it does not constitute sexual intercourse, after all.

            • jorge bernas says:

              @ RM,

              How do you call an OB gynecology male doctor inserting his finger/s or an instrument into the vagina of his patient for any reason was that an act of Adultery, Sexual lntercourse or Rape?

              • RM says:

                If the act was done in the course of the performance of his duty or by virtue of his professional employment, he is not liable for any crime. The legal principle involved is actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. the act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intention were so. In your example, in the absence of any extraordinary circumstance, he will be presumed to have done it in the performance of his professional duty. In other words, it is the burden of the patient to prove that there was criminal intent on the part of the gynecologist to commit the an act which is punishable under the RPC or in special laws. If proven, he may be held liable for rape, violation of RA 9262, etc but not adultery unless he engaged in sexual intercourse with his female patient knowing her to be married.

              • jorge bernas says:

                @ RM,

                Thank you very much….

        • Victin Luz says:

          I am impressed about your topic of artificial insemination @mam Leona…..in relation to CYBERADULTERY . In an A.I. , donated sperms implanted at uterus produces an infant while at CYBERSEX ( adultery ) if any there is no offspring to speak off.

          In your explanation mam@Leona , a woman can be convicted of adultery if her husband has no approval or concurrence to the A. I. biological process because the woman will be introducing spurious heir within the woman’s family, ” ganoon ba Ito” Also mam, how about the donor of the sperm, what will be his liability if the woman will be convicted of adultery? He he ang ganging topic Ito.

          How about a TEST TUBE process of producing human being mam? Will there also be crime committed for the sperm and egg cell DONORs if ever an supurius HEIRs are also introduce to a family.?

          Siguro since the beautiful topic will be related to CYBERCRIMEs in the near future especially when TELEFORTATION of things will come into existence , ” baka naman pweding enlighten us more @mam leona and other lawyers in the blog.

    • Victin Luz says:

      @mam Leona …I googled your criminal law AKA. adultery and other crimes it say’s in an especiall circumstances like INSERTING an I phone 5 to a vagina….. The condition of the MIND of the participants must be considered or construed strictly………. So the possibility or impossibility of a woman at NORMAL CONDITION to insert such is of no moment because it will never happen unless that I phone5 looks like PENIS having some characteristics of the original.

      Please lecture us further on this LOVABLE TOPIC. Because as I go further I read that an an artificial insemination process without the approval of the donors sperm, the woman especially the womans husband constitute adultery. Thank @ leona

      • leona says:

        @Victin luz…what No.? did I put it here? Did I really? Parang hindi ako yun…Anyway, I finished placing what is relevant to Raissa & RM’s issue and for CPMers participation here. Pls give me that ‘No.’ item. Thanks.

        • Victin Luz says:

          @mam Leona ….sorry po, what i mean I read lawyers book on criminal law and basing those fact’s narrated thereat about adultery,,,,,in my own little understanding and analysis the STATE of MIND of a WOMAN allowing herself that an Iphone5 will be inserted on her vagina shall be primarily considered to be accused of such crime and………

          Even if a computer genius will discover/invent and/or perfected MICRO CHIPs to satisfy both parties having CYBERSEX, it will never , can never be charged of Adultery because ,……..now or during that time ( perfected CYBERSEX ) ….. The PICTUREs /PHOTOs of a Cyber Partners appearing on the MONITOR can be change in a split of a second ( say the face of Mona Liza but the body of Angel Locsin etc, ). How will the Fiscal and the Court now determine that , that picture will be original YOU? Or SHE? HOW? mahirap to prove diba.

          If I am going to have a CYBER SEX with my number 2 having known by me to have ” peclat ” at her face or ” pusod ” , why should I google with her photo, for sure I will ” pindot ” the picture of Kristine Hermosa .. mas enjoy ako kasi BAGONG putahi pa.

          • leona says:

            @Victin…my initial answer to your Qs under this Cybercrime law under TRO, is agreeing to Raissa’s question to ass sec SY, who [the latter] per Raissa’s article, said “there is no cybercrime of adultery,” then ‘why include adultery in the Cybercrime law and all the other crimes in the Revised Penal Code?’ which are all without CLARITY of the provisions

            Yes, you’re almost right, a very difficult issue to prove or even to charge under that Cybercrime law but it is there expressly as worded as foolishly understood even by laypersons as consequence of non-careful study and recklessness. Hurriedly passed! I do not know if DOJ and aggrieved parties for adultery will use such a law for adultery committed via cyberspace, with that Lovespak gadget, iPad, or other devices.

            Our lawmerriers just enacted a ‘crazy’ law.

      • leona says:

        @Victin.. baka si “@Lonoera” ‘o “Lenore” atbpa – idem sonam yun…hahaha.

        • clementejak says:

          I’ve seen ONLY one username “leona” posting on this blog”

          Pls read this to be enlighten how did artificial insemination evolved.

          Milestones in the History of Human Artificial Insemination

          1790 – John Hunter first reports artificial insemination in medical literature.

          1899 – Efforts begin in Russia to develop practical methods for human artificial insemination.

          1909 – Human artificial insemination grows more controversial. The Catholic Church objects to all forms of artificial insemination.

          1939 – The first animal, a rabbit, is conceived by artificial insemination.

          Mid 1940s – Artificial insemination becomes an established industry. In Nazi Germany, doctors performed artificial insemination experiments on Jews, gypsies and concentration camp internees.

          1949 – Scientists develop improved methods of freezing and thawing sperm.

          1950 – Cornell University scientists discover that antibiotics can be added to the sperm solution in artificial insemination processes.

          1953 – the first successful pregnancy from artificial insemination of frozen sperm is reported.

          1970s – The sperm bank industry is developed and aritificial insemination becomes commercialized.

          Human Artificial Insemination Today
          As the end of the 20th century neared, controversy and concern over artificial insemination in humans faded and the demand for donor sperm increased.

          • macspeed says:

            im really shocked…to all the expanded words and explanation about adultery in cyber space ….hayyyy

            nagtaksil si lalake or babae sa asawa nila, he he he gamit cyberspace di yata naaangkop sa actual na adulteriya…

    • moonie says:

      pleasey, please, please, leona, let us not forget the virgin birth. the immaculate conception. I would love to see DNA sequencing (mitochondrial one) done on bone samples of one supposed to be jesus christ, and then, comparing the result to the DNA of joseph of nazareth. they might just be biologically father and son. but, but, but immaculate conception it is. or we shall no christmas. and santa claus will lose his job.

      • Baltazar says:

        @moonie,
        And where did they get this supposed Jesus and supposed Joseph of Nazareth? Jesus bodily ascended and there is no DNA connection between Him and Joseph. If you are a Catholic or a Protestant just recite the Apostles’ creed and there’s your basic belief. There’s no need to wait for a stupid DNA test result.

        • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          @Moonie, read here, factutom pablum impactum

          Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae,
          et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum, Dominum nostrum,
          qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine,
          passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus,
          descendit ad inferos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
          ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris omnipotentis,
          inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos.
          Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,
          sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem,
          remissionem peccatorum,
          carnis resurrectionem,
          vitam aeternam.

          • Alan says:

            “credulum impactum “– naniniwala ka sa impakto?

            • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

              Aw, c’mon, Alan, sweetheart. That is just for effect. An atheist does not believe in impakto, manghuhula, sigbin, demonyo and most of all DIOS MIO. he! he! he!

              • Alan says:

                (1) An Ateneo graduate, no less, an atheist? Goodness gracious, what is the world coming to?
                (2) We’re sweethearts? I thought you were married to Ignacio?

          • Vibora says:

            You really are out of your mind. You don’t know what you are doing. May the Lord God have mercy on you.

          • moonie says:

            you speaking in forked tongue?

          • Parekoy says:

            @Pacifico,

            Malas ka talaga ‘tol, dami mo ngang sakit, nasapian ka pa.

            syet talaga ‘tol. awang-awa na ako sayo.

            Mga komenters dito, compassion namana dyan, magnonovena naman tayo …F**k talaga Syet! malas ka talaga ‘tol

          • Parekoy says:

            @Pacifico,

            (Kidding aside)

            If you have kids (bless them), and serious about latin, I recommend you start them with the Minimus Series, then onto Cambridge Latin Course or Wheelocks seem good too. Your kids will treasure the books, they will help them to appreciate the beauty of the Romantic Languages.

  52. Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

    I am soooo tired of slow intermittent internet connection. Can someone dig up whatever happened to benign0 wooing ZTE to comeback to Philippines. I do not care if ZTE brings along their aircraft carrier as long as I have fast internet. I do not care if ZTE bribes anyone in the telecom bureau JUST GIVE US THE SPEED !!!!

    • Alan says:

      I heard all the modems and routers are stashed in a closet in Gloria’s hospital room

    • macspeed says:

      @MRP, perhaps somebody adulterated your connections, guess who he he he those who cant understand your cultured 6th sense dimensions…just play along with us, the CPM’s, but limit your raping act, we may become preggy here he he he

  53. joedelacruise says:

    Good day to everyone….

    Amusing. That is how I rated this current blogpost by Madame Raissa.

    Much as I hate agreeing with anybody, I have to do it again here. I agree with the views of RM in his example, the crime will be, or should be, adultery and not cyber adultery.

    Please remember, everybody, there is no crime yet called “cyber adultery” – there is no legal definition and jurisprudence is still lacking – perhaps a test case can be tried soon enough so that a court may rule on what may constitute “IF done through, by, and with, the use of information communication technology” to make an RPC crime a “cyber crime”.

    Madame Raissa’s comment to RM:
    “You are looking at the law from the prism of today and yesterday.”
    Courts can only rule based on today’s law and yesterdays’ court rulings. Surely, future laws can be made, but in so far as they have not been enacted and enforced, they will remain only in the realms of speculation and It’s best not to dwell on them on present cases.

    As an aside, I couldn’t let this opportunity pass without making a somewhat humorous comment, which will be a very rare occasion for me because I don’t smile often.
    In RM’s example, if presented in court, a lawyer or a judge might ask: “At the time of the insertion, was the iphone connected to the internet?”

    Thank you all.

    • leona says:

      @joe….that’s cruel precyber sodomy if not connected to internet! The issue of RM with Raissa are definite hypothetical facts for definite hypothetical answers…there’s TRO so far on RA 10175. CPM is much more far advance than the Senate and Lower House!

      KUDOS TO ALL CPMers!

      • leona says:

        ..that’s @joedelacruise…brod of Tom…

      • macspeed says:

        Yeahhhhh, we are advance (isinama ko na sarile ko sa CPM he he he please), kulang sa quality control ang Senate and the Lower House, panay pera nasa utak nila, sundin si Ping Lacson, i-audit ang mga nagastos nila, pera ng Bayan nilulustay nila sa Kalokohan…

      • baycas says:

        CPM is much more far advance than the Senate and Lower House!

        - leona

        I like that characterization of this blog as Court of Public & My opinion.

        I would like to invite @joedelacruise to comment on the checklist I posted above on the consequences of the RPC-defined adultery and the still-to-be-defined-but-actually-happening cyber adultery.

        The ease by which cyber adultery can be accomplished and perpetuated with almost the same effect as adultery (sans the consequences of STI and pregnancy) if caught and the relative difficulty of proving such wrongdoing may already justify the one-degree higher penalty that the Cybercrime Prevention Act laid down in its Sec. 6.

        • leona says:

          @baycas…cybercrime adultery will surely create a lot of ‘VIBRATIONS’ ‘n ‘BUZZINGS’ to everyone’s iPad, iPod, Pcs, atbpa!

          Ang ‘Divorce’ bill, if & when, as maybe hurriedly passed also will include it in the Cybercrime Law [under Special Laws & RPC clause] allowing all cybercrimes physical injuries, threats, grave and slight coercion, frustrated and attempted homicide against a spouse, abuse of a spouse, maltreatment – mental, physical & spiritual, atbpa, committed by use of the Internet as grounds for divorce?

          It going to get worst with more petitions at the SC!

  54. Jan says:

    Criminal laws are strictly interpreted. When the law requires the act of sexual intercourse as a requisite to a crime, you cannot expand it to include cyber sex, even when sex toys — or in RM’s example — a cellphone is used.

    • Victin Luz says:

      @Jan…… What was not included is excluded or what was excluded is not included…..tama ba ang na google sa LAW @Jan?

      • RM says:

        You cited a legal principle in the interpretation of a provision of law. that is correct. In fact it may also be applied in the interpretation of contracts. In law, we call it expressio unius est exclusio alterius. The express mention of one person, thing or consequence implies the exclusion of all others.

        EX. Under Rule 130 Sec. 25 of the Rules of Court. No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants.

        Thus applying the principle mentioned above, a person may be compelled to testify against his cousin, brother, sister, uncle etc…. as you notice, however, this principle may appropriately be invoked in cases of provisions which involve an express enumeration of things or persons etc.

  55. Gene Simmowns says:

    Reminds of the 1993 movie Demolition Man.

    Where Spartan (Stallone) and Huxley (Bullock) engaged in sex…not the traditional way…but by using helmets that simulates sexual intercourse.

    Here were the actual lines, took it from the internet:

    Lenina Huxley: I was wondering if you would like to have sex?

    John Spartan: [surprised] Here? With you? Now?

    Lenina Huxley: [nervously, nodding] Mm-hmm.

    John Spartan: Oh yeah.

    Next scene, Huxley then gave him a head gear to wear. Spartan, at first was hesitant, but still decited to try it out as he didnt want to embarass Huxley . Next scenes were really funny! When he closed his eyes, he was surprised to see a virtual Huxley and found himself gasping and of out breath – caused by the friggin head gears electrical pulses.

    [after futuristic, contact-free "sex"]

    John Spartan: Look, Huxley, why don’t we just do it the old-fashioned way?

    Lenina Huxley: [stands up, shocked] Eeewww, disgusting! You mean… *fluid transfer*?

    Lenina Huxley: [stamping her foot] You are a savage creature John Spartan, and I wish for you to leave my domicile now!

    That was in the 90′s – Hollywood style.

    Now it’s getting better…that Lovepalz goes into the actual things…not just in the head!!

    • Baltazar says:

      Yeah, and the movie was really a sort of prophetic …it mentioned a President Schwarzenegger library ;-)

    • ElScorcho says:

      This also reminds me of the 90s film “Coneheads”, where the Conehead daughter put a “sensual ring” on her “flat-head” boyfriend and proceeded to have Conehead sex with him. Also, the look of alarm on Beldar Conehead’s face when he found the said devices in his daughters room: “Argh! Sensual rings!”

      The scene from “Demolition Man” was actually ripped off in a local film starring Eric Quizon. He and his on-screen partner put the tips of their fingers together, covering themselves with (visible) static electricity, and made faces.

  56. Rene-Ipil says:

    @Raissa, you said:

    “But I want to thank you, RM. This definition of sexual intercourse you gave as – “the act of a person inserting…any other object in the vagina of a woman” – makes cyber adultery possible.”

    I must warn you not to take the words of RM as gospel truth in regard to his definition of sexual intercourse. Erudite RM maybe, he committed a gross mistake of foisting on us an erroneous definition of sexual intercourse. Maybe he missed reading Article 266-A(2), as amended, of the RPC in regard to how rape is committed through sexual assault, as follows:

    “”2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.”

    Paragraph 1 above refers to simple rape. As it is, simple rape is committed via sexual intercourse while rape through sexual assault is committed by using the penis or any instrument or object.

    Saxnviolins@11, you are right. Thank you for alerting us early on.

    • jeproks2002 says:

      i agree. the erroneous definition has caused much confusion. perhaps RM would also like to share his definition of “any other object”. Is a finger an object? Will a man who inserts his finger in the vagina or any other orifice of another be guilty of rape? If the finger is not an object, will a finger with a ring be then considered as within the definition of “any other object” now?

    • macspeed says:

      @Rene Ipil,

      wow, i thought that only instrumentation has Orifice which restrict the flow of Fluid, he he he he my goodness, i am really shocked to the max he he he he i just learned it from here hayyyyy the anus is an orifice as well he he he, well??? i dont want to add, it may damage the control system of the Petrochem Refinery he he he

    • RM says:

      You are correct. the definition of sexual intercourse must not be expanded as to include the penetration of any other object. however, adultery may be proven even without a direct evidence showing sexual intercourse. even if the testimonial evidence only refers to an object or oral sex for instance. If the lawyer is good, he may convince the judge that sexual intercourse took place even without such direct evidence. in other words, i mentioned it in the context of prosecuting the crime of adultery. but if we are going to limit our discussion to the elements of adultery, then, we stick with the original meaning of sexual intercourse. and thank you for pointing out the provision on rape. that helps a lot in understanding the concept of rape.

      • Rene-Ipil says:

        RM@22.3

        Your expression of gratitude is always welcome. Your comments are most welcome also. They definitely enrich the CPMers knowledge, warts and all.

  57. Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

    Enough sex already. Let the cybercrime adultery law get passed.

    • JJ says:

      After reading some of the excahnges, it’s but noticeable that most of the bloggers here are all awe when it comes to sex. I don’t blame you. Hahahaha
      My point is about the Revised Penal Code inserted in the Cybercrime Law.
      I guess it’s about time to REVISED the revised penal code again. Time has changed and will keep on changing. Or best, just write a new Cybercrime law alone without inserting the Penal Code. IMO.

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Well, sir, it appears Filipinos loves INSERTION and PENETRATION into laws among others …

      • leona says:

        @JJ…right you are! When it comes to bloggers’ sex issue, that is too much to curtail the gratification we love [ @Parekoy ba ang nag sabi nito?] via cybersex. The SEC. 6 sentence is curtailing already free speech and free press, and then shoots to all other crimes in the Penal Code, which bloggers knows and anticipated, to include ADULTERY! In cybersex?

        Adul Adul Adul na yun! Sobra na! ‘Tery-ahin na!

    • macspeed says:

      he he he @MRP

      he he he you dont want sexy thing he he he you should do sex as always as Honeymoon, treat it as just married first time always and see the result he he he she will be more loving and fun he he he but yes only to your wife not to anybody else he he he

      now CPM’er knows your weaknessess he he he that is a cultural sexy message that shocked you somehow he he he kumonti yun mga blogss mo he he he

  58. edison elemento says:

    Raissa, theres a scene in the movie..Demolition Man..sylvester stallone/ sandra bolluck..where they use the net..{ sex without contact}….

  59. raissa says:

    At Comment No. 11 – 2 lawyers are arguing. – RM and saxnviolins.

    This I gotta watch.

    • Rene-Ipil says:

      Raissa@19

      I think that is the end of it. In fact, I thought of making a reply @11.1 but I decided to let it go. Anyway, I already posted a relevant comment @21.

    • baycas says:

      though i became a justice even before i thought of entering law school, i will pass on the occasion as i respect my ‘pañeros.

      besides, my mom doesn’t want me to watch Sex and Violence too much (i had enough today.).

      …well, there you go…i already hinted on whose team i’m rooting for.

  60. raissa says:

    At comment #4, @Baycas posted a video he found on how the device works

  61. andrew lim says:

    My head is spinning from the discussions on this topic. Just like genetic engineering, advances in electronics will keep lawmakers, the church and others very busy in trying to catch up with their definitions of what is legal/moral/acceptable.

    All I know is this: with those gadgets, you cannot have a safe and satisfying sex life if you have a slow internet connection.

    So in the spirit of the sexual revolution of the 60s: (hemline itaas! neckline ibaba!)

    BANDWIDTH ITAAS!
    INTERNET FEES IBABA!

    :)

    • raissa says:

      I second the motion.

    • Parekoy says:

      When I was a kid in the 70′s, I was wondering why my dicky got hard whenever I saw those women’s nipples trying to puncture their shirts. I love the 70′s.

      Women, please throw away your bras, those are the remnants of men’s hold on your sexuality! i feel you…

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Jesus Mary mother of God @Parekoy, you were in your short pants in the 70s? I reckon you must be in your 60s today !!!

        Manoy, manoy, I am not expert on sex because I am still minor-de-edad. I am 25-years-old. I am still struggling with Pepe and Pilar and Noli Mi and El Feli. I am so tired of sex discussion. Enough already.

        I am not worried if this law is passed because historically PHilippine laws are more ignored than implmeented. Factutom Pobandom. Whatever.

        • Baltazar says:

          @mrp,
          If @parekoy was still wearing shorts in the 70′s, then we was probably in the elementary school those days so more or less he is my contemporary, mid-to-late 40s. Mukhang mahina ang connection mo sa discussion, naka 2G k ba?…pati calculation mahina. Btw, i found this quotation just recently:
          Do not argue with an idiot. They will drag you to their level and beat you with their experience.
          .Lastly, 25? A minor?

          • baycas says:

            @Parekoy @Baltazar,

            Nakakorto rin kayo noong ’70′s?

          • Parekoy says:

            @Baltazar

            I don’t argue with idiots, I show them compassion.

            They are tad beneath the uneducated, for the latter can still learn.

            Syet…mukhang inspired ako gumawa ng quote…
            (ganda na sana ng banat nagmura pa…f**k talaga)

            • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

              You are doing goot @Parekoy, you are now learning from me in mind and in words ! he! he! he! he!

              • Parekoy says:

                @Pacifico,

                Napikon si Johnny nung ikumpara ka ni Joe na pareho kayo intelligent. Hanap ka na ni Joe don sa kabila, punta na muna don at ulitin mo yung mga canned rehash comments mo, asarin mo naman yung mga naligaw don. Dumaan ka na rin sa ibang blogs na nilalangaw, magkalat ka na rin para mas dumami ang langaw.

                Pero balik balikan mo kami dito ‘tol, para laging may punchline.

                tol, bugbug ka dito tol, Syet talaga tol, kakainin ka ng mga commenters dito pag yung baon mo ay panis. Magkalap ka muna ng mga makokopya ko sa ibang blogs, tapos punta ka rito, kunyari creative ka.

                ‘tol hwag kalimutan yung tabletas, take it regularly… :-)

                (sa atin atin na lang tong advice ko sayo tol, baka kasi marinig ng iba kung pano ko ipakita ang compassion ko sayo baka mabigyan ka rin ng paalala.)

        • Alan says:

          It’s obvious naman you’re 25. IQ 25

    • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

      A law lowering the internet fees and bandwidth? I AM ALL FOR IT !!!!

      • Vibora says:

        @MRP
        “A law lowering the internet fees and bandwidth? I AM ALL FOR IT !!!!”
        Lowering bandwidth? you are all for it???
        Alan is right, IQ = 25

        • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          hawr! hawr! hawr! I got my grammar screwed. YOU KNOW WHAT I AM TALKIN’ ‘BOUT.

          Why are Filipinos so highly critical in englsichtzes usage when they know what I am trying to convey?

          Filipinos attack the messenger if they encounter compelling argument.

          They attack englischtzes grammar if they made a compelling statement.

          WHY IS THAT? Hang-gang englischtzes lang ba ang mga Filipnos?

    • Alan says:

      count me in

    • macspeed says:

      @andrew

      he he he he i am really shocked culturally he he he grabbeee naman yan sexual intercourse using iphone, he he he he

      pede ba nokia?? he he he

      i have to control my shocking experience today…please understand he he he

  62. Johnny Lin says:

    Latest Commercial News

    For those interested to buy the latest luxurious RM sex toy covered with Swarovski crystals, buy one now- free electrict toothbrush.

    Go to Greenhills Centralmall, Den-Hip trading, second floor besides the elevator, store with an Apple logo(without the bite) look for Cee-Lang

    Spectacular feature: glows intermittently while vibrating ending with a glaring flash similar to a fireworks show upon orgasm.

    Caution: not for oral use!

    • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

      Calling Margarita Holmes … where are you … come out come out where ever you are … These people here needs sex therapy.

      • macspeed says:

        @MRP

        he he he he i am really shocked he he he i guess you are as well he he he he
        i thougt i got enough experience in Petrochem control and monitoring system, but those becomes mid average technology, now there’s too much control and monitoring which was never involved in any Refineries= Remote ecstasy hayyyyy grabeee
        is it a crime? Is it adultery??? he he he ass sec sy please, you are shocking my cultural dimensions he he he

      • Alan says:

        If Holmes isn’t availalbe we could call Arroyo. An expert in screwing. The country

        • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          Aw, c’mon, Alan, have respect for the disabled near-death former president elected by the Filipinos. Who do you think of FILIPINOS? 25 IQ-pointers?

          They are lucky this time, by a fluke of nature, they elected crying benign0 Aquino. This time Filipino will vote in force for Binay. I hope he will be another fluke-by-luck.

          • Alan says:

            Did you bring the violins?

            • moonie says:

              I thought it was renato corona (mrp’s namesake) who is iyakin. seen crying many times on t.v. magaling umarte. that disabled and near-death former president is strong as an ox! ang bilis niyang makarating sa airport, buti kamo nahabol in de lima. that wheel chair is just a prop.

            • vander anievas says:

              near death? masamang damo, nunca. ang mutha ay hindi kayang lipulin.

  63. baycas says:

    Warning: NSFW
    (A re-post from the first Cyber Adultery thread)

    Wow, this blog never ceases to amaze me…

    It’s rather naughty or kinky…but I wouldn’t think that operational definitions of “cyber sexual intercourse” and “cyber carnal knowledge” will be insinuated here.

    Both, I have read in a few comments but somehow with improvement or modification, may mean:

    Sexual penetration or close sexual contact with a continuously ringing device or gadget equipped with 3G, 4G or LTE capability and put on Vibration mode

    Tsk, it is now even harder to prosecute because weak or bad signal may be a defense…

    Hmm, perhaps cyber adulterers will get hold of smart phones with dual, triple, or quintuple SIM cards.

    • baycas says:

      N.B. The above operational definition takes care to avoid Apple-centricity as Android and Windows devices/gadgets may also be used.

    • Alan says:

      LOL. “Your honor, I submit there was no adultery because there was no signal”

      • baycas says:

        @Alan,

        Judge shouted, “Case dismissed.”

        Then whispered to the accused, “Didn’t you try Wi-Fi?”

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        WiMax Sucks !!! Globe Telecom WiMax dropped signal is frequent.

        PLDT do not connect to my barrio because they are only allowed one roll of wire from the main barangay road!

        So I have to contend with Globe Telecom WiMax.

        right now I am using smoke signal for back-up !!!!

    • Parekoy says:

      Namputsa, abswelto agad. Mahirap i prove beyond reasonable doubt :-)

    • leona says:

      btw…how will the ‘Judge’ know about the device/gadget unless he/she tries it on during court room trial for admissibility purposes. Defense will vehemently object if it is tried inside the judge’s Chamber by the judge alone…during a court recess?

      • baycas says:

        He tried it. That’s why he dismissed the case due to a recorded message he heard on the line:

        “Subscriber cannot be reached. Please try your call later.”

        Proof that the allegation of cyber adultery may not pass the “beyond the reasonable doubt” that the sexual act was indeed consummated.

        Incidentally, the judge tried the setup on his legal wife…for the record.

        • leona says:

          …then, what say you senators? Sotto? Angara? atbpa? You people didn’t anticipate PTY CL = please try your call later!

      • macspeed says:

        @leona he he he

        WHAT??? he he he he grabee, buti kung may K sya he he he

  64. YlocanaBelle says:

    and for those of you who remember Barbarella…perhaps this would better illustrate my point. “The most outrageous sex scene of the film ” Barbarella” is the one with Barbarella and the evil scientist Durand ” so if this isn’t sex then I don’t know what is! ;) http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1235u_barbarella-orgasmatron_fun#.UPcXHCdQFBk

    • duquemarino says:

      @YlocanaBelle
      Barbarella was portrayed by Jane Fonda and the contraption was called “Excessive Machine” then. Now it’s called “LovePalz”

  65. YlocanaBelle says:

    I think to say oral sex or sex using aps (LOL it’s the new word so why can’t we all be intelligent high tech people and admit reality?) is not having sex is delusional on the part of lawmakers. just like when somebody hires a hitman to kill somebody makes him the ‘mastermind’. same scenario here…the mastermind uses a ‘hitman’ in the form of a dildo or lovepalz and gets the desired effect doesn’t he? ;) btw unless he can’t get it up for any reason he’s still touching his peepee and she’s touching her weewee and that’s physically stimulating each other even while apart to consumate a ‘love encounter’ over the air cos he’s not talking to mr. postman or mrs. jones! just my humble sex opinion. amend those stupid laws now! and give women/men the right to divorce those cyber sex freaks! ;)

    • springwoodman says:

      Excuse me, all this talk of peepees and weewees is bothering me in a risible kind of way.

      It’s like we’re adults talking about sex but using baby language and euphemisms.

      The discussion would be more straightforward and clinical – and less hilarious – if we used the generic terms “genitals”, “penis”, and “vagina”.

      I would be the last one to quote Enrile but let’s call a spade a spade.

      • Parekoy says:

        @springwoodman

        genital, penis, and vagina are clinical terms.

        YlocanaBelle’s weewee seems naughty for my taste. It brings back memories when we were playing doctor. Keep using it YlocanaBelle. I need to get my stetoscope and speculum.

        • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          @Parekoy, why it is not bastos to say sex in english but unspeakably bastos when it is sayed in Tagalog?

          • Parekoy says:

            Malalim yang tanong mo, freudian. Kailangang tanungin mo si Ambet Ocampo sa historical perspective at sa pychological si Aguiling-Dalisay ng UP.

            Baka merong legal explanation si Prof. RM…kaso baka sabunin ka non.

            • pinay710 says:

              @parekoy paki sabi kay mrp PAKIKIPAGTALIK o PAGTATALIK NG BABAE AT LALAKE ang salitang tagalog ng pakikipag sex. ari ng babae(VAGINA) ari ng lalake(PENIS) hindi bastos ang dating.

      • baycas says:

        Care to start it off in the vernacular? Pilipino or Tagalog, for instance…

        • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

          Why are Filiipnos not comfortable with the vernacular of penis and vagina ?

        • Baltazar says:

          ala eh, ka bastos naman pag tinagalog !

          • baycas says:

            :lol:

          • baycas says:

            @Baltazar,

            Medyo disimulado…at pang-eskuwela pa:

            Ti-squared (T-square)

            Ki-squared (Chi-square)

            • Baltazar says:

              @baycas
              LOL. But seriously, I realized that most Filipinos no matter how malicious their minds are would always try to euphemize the bastos english words..
              Way back in the early 80′s (and that was during my high school days..sarap!), the TikTik komiks-magazine gained its popularity. Back then, only those having 11mm home projectors ( and Betamax for the more affluent) could watch porno. And for us who are so curious about the stuff and whose pubic hairs are just in the category of a cat’s fur ( balahibong pusa ) can only get away with the TikTik. The magazine will be passed among the boys..and you’ll be lucky when the magazine reaches you with pages in tip-top condition because most of the time, they will be sticking to each other :-). ..and you know why.
              BUT here’s my observation: Authors and comics illustrators for those magazines would always use the less-taboo terms like:
              ari or sandata for the penis , hiyas for the vagina, kuntil for the clitoris , labi for the labia , mainit na katas for men’s cum and nektar for women’s cum/seminal fluid. Pasensiya na po CPMers,, just sharing and I hope this will educate us all in a positive way…pero kahit ako, nababastusan sa mga pinagsasabi ko. ;-)

      • macspeed says:

        @spring he he he

        your are shocked just like me and MRP who could not comment he he he

  66. tristanism says:

    So if I use that synchronized gadget mentioned in your blog with someone else’s wife in the next room, she’s not committing adultery?

    Nice.

    • raissa says:

      Try it and tell us about it.

      • tristanism says:

        Naw, I was merely reacting to RM’s definition of sexual intercourse in relation to cyberadultery.

        I belong to a breed of men collectively known as Takusa.

        • clementejak says:

          Takut sa asawa!

          There’s anaother term “Sansui”

          • baycas says:

            Ayos ang mga tropa…

            Takusa, UHAW, Sansui, Macho, at Tigasin.

            Pero talo ng lolo ng kapitbahay ko yang mga grupo na yan sa tinatag niya sa barangay…

            Combat!

            • Gene Simmowns says:

              Takusa is a bit harsh…hehehe!

              “Happy wife…happy life!”…as my Kiwi boss use to say…

              I strongly agree with him.

            • tristanism says:

              Let’s see.

              Takot sa asawa — Takusa

              Isang sutsot uwi — Sansui

              Tigasaing, tigalaba etc. — Tigasin

              Ano ung macho, UHAW at combat?

              • baycas says:

                Ang kuwento ng kapitbahay ko…

                Ang Lolo Leon daw niya ay minsang kasapi ng Unified Husbands Afraid of Wives kaya automatic ring naging Machonurin kay Lola Endeng.

                Kaya lang sadyang mahigpit at malupit si Lola Endeng kaya’t napilitang magtatag ng bagong grupo si Lolo Leon bilang kinatawan ng mga Andres sa kanilang barangay…

                Combatuk-batukan daw nga naman ni lola si lolo eh ganun-ganon na lang. Kalunus-lunos…

              • pinay710 says:

                bago yung SANSUI, ngayon ko lang nalaman yun. hihihihi

            • Baltazar says:

              @baycas,
              Wala yan sa lolo ng kapitbahay ko..Yun, abot tanaw pa lang ang asawa niya, yumuyukod kaagad. Miyembro kasi yun ng YUKOSA – Yukod sa asawa.

              • baycas says:

                ‘Yang Yukosa ang sinasabi ng lolo ng isa ko pang kapitbahay…

                Kalaban daw ‘yan ng Sigue-Sigue Commando. Mahirap daw makasapi sa samahang ito…

                May public humiliation daw!

        • macspeed says:

          he he he same feathers flucked together he he he pati sa mga anak takot din ako he he he sisipain dw ako pagtanda ko kung ako ay kukuha ng kabit he he he better not…

  67. saxnviolins says:

    In this example, the penetration was accomplished with the use of an iPhone, because as “RM” explained “carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act (of) a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.”

    No sir. Cite me your case which refers to “any other object”.

    Jurisprudence refers to “carnal union” .

    lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1951/may1951/gr_l-3047_1951.html

    That means union of the flesh (carne in Spanish, karne in Tagalog). It involves the union of the sword and the scabbard. Any object other than the sword (punyal if the guy is not so gifted) will not make it a carnal union.

    • RM says:

      Of course there has to be a physical contact of the penis and vagina.

      But I am talking from a different context. I am talking about the context of proving the elements of the crime of adultery in court. There is a whole world of difference between What you know and how you are going to apply what you know in court. To quote a famous line in the movie Law Abiding Citizen: It’s not what you know. It’s what you can prove in court.

      Say for instance, you just got home and when you entered your room you saw your wife, undressed, humping on top of a stranger. however, you were not able to see if there is really a physical penetration of the penis and the vagina because their lower extremities are partially covered by a blanket.

      He wanted to file a complaint for adultery and hired you as the lawyer. Are you simply going to decline the case because there is no direct evidence that would establish that there was physical contact between the vagina and the penis?

      Now consider it in this light. you entered your room. you saw your wife lying on her back with her legs wide apart. open sesame. before I am going to complete the picture, i suppose we are all adults here. So you saw the stranger fisting your wife. i dont think i need to elaborate on it more.

      Again, he hired you as his lawyer. Are you going to tell him that, hey unless and until you get me a picture of a penis of a stranger stuck in the vagina of your wife we do not have a case. That is the very fact that needs to be proved in court! Desperate, he asked for my help. I say we go file a case for adultery. Under the facts, it is already sufficient to warrant a conviction for the crime of adultery. How? By using circumstantial evidence and wits. This crime of adultery, this is often very hard to prove. So, according to the SC, the crime of adultery may be proved by circumstantial evidence. It’s like pieces of a puzzle which, if completed ,will lead you to a reasonable, credible, and logical conclusion that the act sought to be proved indeed happened. There are so many cases decided by the SC where the accused couples were not actually caught in the act doing the deed but still convicted them.

      But if we are not going to talk about the fact of proving a crime in court. We are just going to talk about the elements of a crime. the very facts that constitute the crime. I say we stick with the definition. And i agree with you. There has to be a carnal union.

      • Victin Luz says:

        @RM……..I am not a lawyer,……but in your meaning of sexual intercourse ….any other object inserted in the vagina thus adultery was committed thru circumstantial evidence upon proving in court ( granting you are going to apply what you know in court ) ……@RM , it will never be elevated to the court. At the FISCALs office the case of adultery will be dismissed outright because that ” any other object ” means similar object having physical appearance like ” OURs ” or POSSIBLE OBJECT — acceptable and allowed by the woman during that time having a NORMAL CONDITION of her MIND ( no drugs , no hypnotism , threat , intimidation ,bribery and etc..hav been employed ) or even at LUCID INTERVAL ..will fulfill satisfaction to the insertion base to what was inserted BUT NEVER an I phone 5……. any woman who allowed an I phone5 inserted in their vagina is mentally disturbed thus acquitting her of any crime of adultery especially if certified by a medical practitioner or a psychologist ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but maybe crime of RAPE must have been committed by the man.

        I just base my opinion on your circumstantial evidence…..

        • Victin Luz says:

          As I am googling your law book on criminal law…..I came across and IMPOSSIBLE CRIME of impossible circumstances…….so I say I phone5 .. An impossible object inserted in a vagina is an impossible evidence for the crime of Adultery to be passed on at FISCALs Office.

          But I will only agree with your comments if the I phone 5 , we were talking here was design as penis together with some of ours physical charactersictic like vibrators.

          If you want your circumstantial evidence to be accepted by by the court and the FISCALs I think you have also to qualify ” I phone5- inserted object to the vagina “

          • RM says:

            You seem to be interested with the study of criminal law. that is a good sign that perhaps you might wanna try enrolling even just for a semester. i guarantee that you will enjoy it. after all, the subject of criminal law 1 is included in the 1st semester. i really hope you consider my advice. =)

            • Victin Luz says:

              Ha ha @RM…… Ngek ayaw ko, mas masarap mag laro ng mahjong until midnight and wait for my pension when I reach the age of 65… Nandyan naman kayo nina @mama Leona to inspire us here on @RAISSas blog… Makikisawsaw nalang kami sa inyo sa kaunting naiintindihan namin sa mga isinusulat ninyo at mga nababasa namin sa mga libro ninyo Attu@RM….

              What I really want is to study and master on how can I/WE COLLECT an UNPAID COLA CLAIMS/DIFFERENTIALs ( for me 1.4m pesos ) since I retired on the year 2001. Our lawyers officemates had already collected fees to represent us in court but until now DBM so as our BOARD refused to released funds for us.

              Thanks @RM…. We are learning a lot from you.

      • pelang says:

        wow! i’m really enjoying this discussion. thank you guys!

  68. fed_up says:

    I have my surprise today with Ms Raissa’s blog; looking at the “Live Feed” pane on the right, I saw for the first time that this blog is also being read in Moscow City, Russia. Maybe the Russians are as interested as us Filipinos in the sexuality of things that are being tackled here: “a vibrating iphone being inserted into…., etc.”

    Maybe we are introducing into the world a new kind of “technology” on how to deal with ordinary matters.

    • Alan says:

      ICTs – Information and Communication Technologies – are ubiquitous and pervasive. In the 1990s Nicholas Negroponte noted how the world was being divided into atoms (for instance, a paper document) and digital bits (a pdf of that document). He predicted that many things we’re doing in “real” (atomic) life will have its equivalent in digital life or cyberspace

    • macspeed says:

      @feds

      he he he they are shocked to the max he he he like MRP, thingking about how stupid the cyber adultery is included in the cyber crime law he he he

    • RM says:

      Can i just reply to my own comment? I have to admit i really enjoyed reading your blog Raissa. =)

      • RM says:

        Forgive me for replying to the reply of my own comment… i just want say to that I like how you think Raissa. Very creative and imaginative. I totally support your cause against the Cybercrime Law. =) I sincerely hope and pray that it be declared null and void for being unconstitutional.

  69. Baltazar says:

    These toys (dildo & masturbator) were already existing for decades and with the touch,voice and graphic interfaces provided by smartphones nowadays , top it up with the capabilities of a 3G or 4G networks…my my my…cyber adultery can be real! In fact , this system can still be improved using PCs coupled with virtual reality helmets for 3D visuallization and brain computer interface devices that process cognitive responses ( just google for the terms please). Smartphones make up for the mobility which makes it possible even for a cable guy to have sex atop an electric post …syet! What remains is to really qualify cyber adultery into a crime and that is if the CCL passes.

    • macspeed says:

      i am cultured shocked again he he he he but slowly i can relate due to my automation experience in Instrumentation he he he now this is my delivery of cultural shock waves to CPM he he he

      it doesnt require a Law study to understand what is wrong and what is right, but if one is going for a debate regarding legal matters, you must be a Law graduate he he he

      galing naman nun LovePalz he he he the sensors is synchronized with each pair, if the other one goes on high speed, the pair device goes high speed as well he he he dapat dun lagi fully charge yun batteries he he he

      what a life, after ejaculation, each one will laugh and say, “we are crazy, aint we??? he he he anyways, i love you sweet heart, just be true to me and nobody touches that peanut except me he he he”

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Hi! @Macspeed, BUSY BUSY BUSY OVER HERE ….

        Here is opinion of when sex is legal.

        When Bill Clinton gave his deposition in the Paula Jones case, he said he had never had “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky. But Lewinsky has reportedly testified to a number of acts that most people think of as sex. Can both statements somehow be true? Is it possible that the two of them had intimate contact, yet Clinton still did not perjure himself? In the intricate world of the law, a world of hairsplitting distinctions where the President is famously at home, it just may be so. Here’s why.

        At Clinton’s deposition, Jones’ legal team asked Judge Susan Webber Wright to approve a very precise, three-part definition of sexual relations. Clinton’s attorney Robert Bennett objected to the whole definition, but to the last two parts especially, as being too broad. Wright agreed to disallow parts 2 and 3, leaving only the first, narrowest definition of sex in place.

        With that, Clinton may have been given the room to offer a technically “true” denial to the question of whether he had sex with Lewinsky–even if she happened to perform fellatio on him. The truncated definition characterizes sex in terms of a checklist of body parts, including the genitals, breast and thigh. Oral sex would not necessarily require the President to touch anything on Lewinsky that appears on that list. Strange as it may sound, under one reading of the definition, Lewinsky could have been having sex with him (because she was “touching” the President’s genitals) while at the same moment, he was not having sex with her. (At the deposition, Clinton wasn’t asked if she had sexual relations with him, just if he had them with her.) Isn’t the law a wonderfully intricate device?

        There are problems with the legalistic defense. For one thing, if Clinton and Lewinsky did have oral sex, is it really likely that he did not touch any body parts mentioned in the Jones definition? (Lewinsky has testified that Clinton fondled her.) And because that definition says that a person engages in sex if he or she “causes” contact with the genitals of “any person,” it could be argued that Clinton caused Lewinsky’s contact with his, even if he did not otherwise touch her. He could reply that she was the cause, or at least the active partner, while he was merely the passive receiver, but that makes him seem like either an implausibly shrinking violet or a very cool customer. Beyond all that, Lewinsky’s secret grand-jury testimony may simply be so detailed and explicit that it leaves no room for loopholes.

        Even if the word-wiggle keeps Clinton out of the perjury trap, it won’t help him politically because it doesn’t account for his Jan. 26 televised insistence that he “did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” When he spoke before the cameras, the lawyerly definition of sex wasn’t in force. And in a recent TIME/CNN poll, 87% of those questioned said that oral sex was, well, sex. Hiding behind the ultimate tortuous legalism could help the President get through his testimony, but it won’t pass the laugh test with the American people–which is why Clinton won’t be parsing the meaning of “sexual relations” in any public statements.

        • Parekoy says:

          Wow! Now you are scaring me!

          @Raissa, can you please check if another account is using Pacificos handle.

        • Alan says:

          A lucid Ignacio moment. Off on a tangent, may we wonder if Arroyo still has time for sex?

          • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

            Eowwww !!!! Alan, Alan, Alan. Leave Aling Glo alone. Everbody is aware that Aling Glo dumped benign0 Aquino that is why benign0 Aquino is soooo angry at her.

            • Alan says:

              What made you think I was talking of Gloria? I never used the word “corrupt”

              • Parekoy says:

                @Alan

                Mukha ngang hindi na. Last time ko syang nakita na halos maiyak nong impeachment ni Corona, masyadong bugnutin.

                Mukhang si Omb. Carpio ay mas may glow pa sa kanya.

          • Baltazar says:

            Ask Nani Perez :-)

            • Parekoy says:

              Oy si Baltazar, may alam din :-) Ilang milyon katumbas ng bigote ni pogi, ala eh, tumirik daw ang mata, tsismis lang yun, kaya. Mataning nga si cristy Fermin…

              • Baltazar says:

                Ay kabayan eh…. alaman mo naman ang tulis naming mga Batanguenyo.. – balisong – saksak dine saksak doon…at hindi tsismis …he he :-) Kita mo’t nagpa taas pa ng boobs.

          • moonie says:

            didn’t gloria arroyo ask for internet connection while still in veterans? she also ask for cell phones to be provided to her. madre mia. was she thinking of cyber adultery then?

  70. Parekoy says:

    @Raissa,

    (bulong mode ho ito…)

    may nagpapatanong lang po, yung kaibigan ko po na nasa abroad. saan daw po ba pwedeng ma order ito, sa amazon ho ba meron nito? sabi po daw ng asawa nya, meron daw ho bang model na parang may bulutong? yun din daw hong kaopisina nya, nagpatanong na rin kung may model na double aksyon? yun ho palang pilyong janitor nila nagpatanong na rin, meron din daw ho bang ibang accessories na yun ho daw parang alligator clips na pwedeng ilagay sa mga utong. iyon hong nurse, nagpatanon na rin kung meron din daw ho ba itong manual mode para po sa singular usage (siguro ho ibig sabihin nya, nagsasarili), yun hong isang pilyang nurse na nakailan na pong boyfriend na arabo nagpatanong din daw ho sa kanya- baka daw po taiwanese size lang daw po ang available model bale baka daw ho malugi daw ho sya sa bayad, alam naman daw ho natin yung sa mga tsekwa yung XL nila ugat pa lang pa ng mga arabo.

    pasensya na po maam, napagbilinin lang ako. promise po hindi para sa akin ito. promise po talaga. mamatay man po si Pacifico, talaga pong hindi para sa akin ito. talagang talaga po…napansin ho ako ng kaopisina ko na habang nagtatyp ako nito, namumula raw ho ang pisngi ko, sabi ko po sa kanya natural lang po pag pinanganak na tisoy…pasensya na po, promise hindi talaga ito para sa akin…

    salamat po…

    • raissa says:

      @baycas – pakitulong nga sya. Magaling ka sa pag research sa internet.

      • netty says:

        hahaha, sabog ang laway ko pagtawa. Uy Penoys talaga. Wait ka lang baka meron dito sa Canada E-bay. What color do you prefer, brass , aluminum chrome , gold or silver. Would you like any upgrade at the tip like studded with diamonds, precious
        stones or semi precious, luminous or not? Pwede rin siguro additional warranty for 2-3 years in case not working well. Mind you batteries not included, so saksak mo na , i mean plug in na, sori CPMERS ALIW NA ALIW LANG AKO TALAGA DITO SA BLOGSITE NA ITO, eto caps na nga eh. Sobrang saya.

        • fed_up says:

          @netty. Order din ako, basta hindi “Made in China”. Mas epektibo siguro ito kaysa sa “boletas” na inuso ng mga Pinoy seaman noong 1970s-1980s. Alam na alam ng mga maritime nations sa Ejrope ang Pinoy “technology” na ito. Hindi mo kasi maitatatuwa ito pagdaan sa security scan sa mga airport, tutunog yong scanner nila. Ngingiti na lang yong security kaysa pilitin ka na ipakita sa kanya.

          • Parekoy says:

            Minsan binanggit ko kay misis na bawasan. Gawing tatlo na lang na jade, kaysa lima, kasi na-stuck minsan. Nagtampo sa akin, hindi ko na raw sya mahal. Anong nagawa ko, di status quo.

            • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

              Why bother dildo. It is expensive. Why not use eggplant instead. Cheap and edible.

              • macspeed says:

                he he he he my goodness he he he eggplant fried and sliced to 1/4″ are good for Falapilsandwich rather than shawarma, it is a snack sandwich with sesame paste, onions,ketsup, fried potato, fired cullyflower and tomatoes sliced he he he delicious, he he he with food around, not guilty of adultery he he he i just eating snacks he he he

            • fed_up says:

              @Parekoy. When I was still working as seaman, we had this story of a Ch. Engr who went home for vacation after finishing his 10 mos. contract on board. He had a “bearing” (boletas) put on his manhood without telling his Mrs. about it. On their first night, the wife came to know about it, she was so scandalized being an active lay minister in their local Catholic Church. She wanted to have the “bearing” removed at once but since they were living in a small town in an island in Palawan, he feared going to the local doctor to have the “bearing” removed. He will surely be the talk of the town. What happened was, he prevailed on his wife retain the it and have it removed on board the ship when he goes back to sea in three months at the end of his vacation period.

              When he went back to sea, the first letter he received from his wife was her wife’s plea not to remove the “bearing” anymore!!!!

              • Parekoy says:

                A cousin of mine had his boletas. He waited a week to heal the entry on his foreskin. Then, he was to excited and paid a hooker. They had sex. When it was time to pay, the hooker still with a glow, declined and said it was for keeps!

                When my cousin was putting on his underwear, he was surprised, the boletas were gone, and left was a bleeding foreskin. Fuck!, he said. Tried to recover it from the hooker, did so, found the 5 balls and the hooker let out a scream! She climaxed again!

                Before he left the room, the hooker gave him hug, a kiss,then slipped some bills inside his pockets!

                Once he was inside his car, he took out the bills, found some hunded bills, a note with a cellphone number, and a message that if he got those balls back, then the next tryst will be free!

                That’s when I decided to have those too. The dick looks like it has some smooth big warts, but it is worth having them.

              • macspeed says:

                he he he he ball bearing, 316SSL (this is the steel that withstand corrosion in Petrochem he he he 316 stainless steel Low carbon) grabee pinoy he he hehe

              • Diwata says:

                that’s a lot of BULLitas! LOL having those bolitas under your foreskin doesn’t do anything for a woman. ang dapat sa mga lalaking gustong maging happy si esmi is to practice with his dila! hay ano ba? ang pinoy kasi masyadong macho kuno e wala naman hanggang 4″-5″ dagdagan pa ng kung ano-ano. magkaproblema pa si esmi sa mga decorasyon na yan! ;P

              • Parekoy says:

                @Diwata

                Pangalan mo palang talagang para kang isang mahiwaga.

                Dahil sa hula mo, kinuha ko ang ruler agad at sinukat, 5 pulgada nga! Wow Syet! Galing ng ESP mo.

                Mamaya pag natapos na maligo na si Misis, papahaplos ko sa kanya at sukatinnamin pag nabuhay na, kanina kasi luntoy pa at kulobot na maigi, malamig pa aircon, at yung mga kulugong esmeralda ay nagku-kumpol-kumpol.

                Siguro, hindi pa tayo properly introduced, ang aking nga palang middlename ay Caballo (Kabayo ang pagbigkas sa espanyol, mga ninuno namin sa Lipa, yung nanay ng Lola ko sa tuhod ay naanakan ng isang Kastila na ang tatay ay angkan ng mga manlulupig na Arabo sa Granada, Spain.

                Diwata, ang manghuhula ng haba ng sandata. Bow!

          • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

            HA! HA! HA! Ha! I always get a pat down after x-ray at the airport because of my bulging in-betweens.

            • Parekoy says:

              @Pacifico

              Putsa, tol, mahirap yan. Patingin ka sa doctor, baka Hydrocephalus yan. Syet…dami mo ng sakit.

              Pray kita tol…

              • macspeed says:

                @parekoy

                he he he he sabog ang uhog ko at luga pati tinae ko lumabas hayyy

                he he he puyat na naman ako nito he he he

              • moonie says:

                parekoy, you are aware that hydrocephalus pertains to the skull, not down below. the brain being full of cerebrospinal fluid, the skull is enlarged.

                do you mean hydrocele of the testis?

              • Parekoy says:

                @moonie

                Aware ako don. ‘pat down’ para leading at nagyayabang kasi Pacifico na malaki yung etets nya, pero freudian slip yung ‘bulging in-betweens’ dahil yung in-between can be his ears., he was also trying to imply that he is brainy.

                You picture him with his big head full of fluids, and then remember his idiotic canned rehashed rants; it will alter your preconception of him. Suddenly, you feel compassion for the poor guy. He just wants to belong, he just wants a little attention, and I think we are compassionate and generous enough to oblige.

                kawawa naman. atin atin na lang ito, baka pag narinig nya magtampo sya, sensitive sya…

            • moonie says:

              poor MRP got patted often at airports, he should not be smuggling eggplants in his pants.

            • Parekoy says:

              @moonie

              I was also planning to pun the word but decided not to to let the reader explore other meanings.

              Could have made it as HydrocePHALLUS, which could create a more vivid imagery, and also added some leaks and stains with puss-like substance on his pants at the fly area and lo! Pacifico will be a certified Venereal Disease carrier! I decided not to, he has too many issues already. :-)

        • macspeed says:

          ha ha ha ha ha i am really shocked he he he

          how did Raissa handle this? Baka natawa rin sya secretly he he he he

      • baycas says:

        Sshh…

        Will do it hush-hush…

    • Alan says:

      HAHAHAHA

    • baycas says:

      :lol:

    • pinay710 says:

      @parekoy, hahaahhaahah talaga naman pagka ganito ang usapan lumalabas ang pagka PILIPINO na magaling sa usapang kalye. hehehhehehe kayo talaga oo nakakaaliw. kaya nga ba ang PILIPINO kahit daming problema magaling magdala. YAN ANG PILIPINO MAGALING MAGDALA NG SULIRANIN. MABUHAY KAYO MGA PINOY!! mapa legal, mapa kaberdehan ok na ok kayo. nakakawala kayo ng problema talaga. salamat sa mga impormasyon. sa edad kong ito bago sa akin ito. parekoy, kabayan kung nasa america ang kaibigan mo sabihin mo meron sa flyer ng DR LEONARDS ang mga ganung gadget.

      • Parekoy says:

        @pinay710

        (bulong mode ho ito…)

        May nagpapatanong lang ho

        Baka daw ho pwedeng makuha yung personal na rekomendasyon nyo sa mga gadgets don sa DR Leonards. Kumusta naman daw po, naaliw din ho ba kayo? May bulutong din ho ba yong paborito nyo?

        Napatanong lang talaga po ito ng kaibigan ko at hindi po talaga para sa akin ito…

        Sa atin-atin na lang ho ito, hindi naman ho tayo naririnig ng ibang commenters dito. Hiyang-hiya nga po ako sainyo…

        • pinay710 says:

          (bulong mode din ito ha0 @ hoy parekoy wala ako nyan. hindi na kami gumagamit nyan.nakalipas na yan. dagdag gastos lang yan. heheheh kayo na lang kabataan ang gumamit nyan. baka maospital lang kami hehehheeh wala kaming insurance kabayan. laking kahihyaan sa mga apo namin hehehehehhehe ikaw talaga oo!!

          • pinay710 says:

            ay ano ba yan, napahalo tuloy ako sa kalokohan nyo. aba eh seryosong usapan itong cyber adultery. balik na kayo sa batas na pinaguusapan. hehehheheeh baka malingatan na naman tyo eh may MAISINGIT na naman na mas grabe. hala kayo!!

          • macspeed says:

            ha ha ha ha ha di na yata ako makakapag aral ng gawain ko bukas hayyyyy he he he he

    • jeproks2002 says:

      @parekoy
      there’s another way to achieve the objective without the bolitas. it works well if you (or your friend) are keloidal or develop hypertrophic scars. all you have to do is get a blade and make some cuts on your thing. as soon as these heal you will have an ampalaya like ding dong instead of a mere “eggplant”.
      there’s one problem though. be sure not to engage in any activity that will cause blood to rush to this area when the scabs begin to develop. as you very well know, when this part “expands” the scabs expands too and well it may not be a very pleasant experience.

      • Parekoy says:

        @jeproks2002

        You are correct, that is another way.

        It reminds me of my high school classmate, his family is well off and his uncle is a doctor. His uncle did the circumcision, made three slits, folded the skin and sutured. Later, my relative who became his wife complained to my wife that those scabs were really sharp and no longer pleasurable but a bane. So I showed him my jade “ballections” and he had his dick operated to take out the scabs and inserted some balls too. After that my relative never complained and thank my wife for sharing our secret.

  71. baycas says:

    Wanted: operational definitions of “cyber sexual intercourse” and “cyber carnal knowledge”, essential elements of “cyber adultery”

    Some lawmakers will have a field day with this…

    However, rough sailing may happen…as regards the SSS, it took awhile before the senators agreed…imagine the discussion of how SSS is accomplished…

    Again, some lawmakers will have a field day with this…

    • raissa says:

      Araguy.

    • baycas says:

      Missed out a word…that will be “field day”.

    • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

      Before cyberadultery happens there has to be cybermarriage with cybercontract and cybersex.

      Factutom probandum pablum cereal

      • macspeed says:

        he he he your back he he he welcome, you are cultural shocking me again he he he or i mean us he he he the CPM’s

      • tristanism says:

        That is actually funny. Good one. :)

      • clementejak says:

        Not so; Adultery has been in existence since biblical times. In the Ten Commandments No. 7 is “Thou shalt not commit adultery.

        In Mathew 5:28; “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart”.

        Sex always comes first before marriage. In legal parlance, marriage is necessity before an adultery can be charge.

      • moonie says:

        gee, does this means well have computers marrying computers? with ISPs providing ceremonies. many will object to this! what if the computers are gay? or lesbians?

    • macspeed says:

      @baycas, day by day, my cultural shocked (CS) is synchronizing with the trend he he he initially, i dont know what is CPM he he he language barrier sign of CS, then i read lots of CPM’s comments, wowwwww he he he CS again he he he but i like it he he he

      i will wait what the Law dudes defines those he he he

      • baycas says:

        Try reading past Raissa Robles’s blog posts. You will note that there is really nothing to be shocked about culturally…

        Unless, you already became a coconut…brown on the outside, white on the inside!

        That is when a condescending nature towards countrymen will exist.

  72. Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

    Sex is not sex without penetration. Oral sex (ewwww !!!! clinically unsanitary, absolutely not hygeinic. I NEVER DO THAT!!! Eoooowwwwww !!!!) is not considered sex.

    There is precedence: Bill and Monica

    Bill did not peentrate Monica with his organ. He did penetrate her with Cuban Cigar but under their law it is not sex. She did went down on him. He squirted her face and into heer blue dress BUT IT WAS NOT SEX.

    SEX IS PENETRATION OF VAGINA WITH THE PENIS !!!!!

    Ewwww !!!!! In my world, children are still delivered by Storck or FedExed 24-hour delivery.

    • raissa says:

      But RM said it can be any object

    • Parekoy says:

      @Pacifico

      Welcome back!

      For the past 48 hours, I was worried that something bad happened to you. I’m truly glad that you are still here.

      Just a friendly reminder to take your medications regularly :-)

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        @Parekoy, my friend, thank you for missing me. I am sooo busy with the inaugration of Barack … I’ll be in and out but will not be posting as frequently as I should …

        Parekoy, take care of the house ….. while I am not around ….

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        @Parekoy, since you are expert on Tagalog, Barack asked me what is the english translation of “PANG-ILAN PRESIDENTE SI BARACK OBAMA?”

        How many is Barack Obama as President?

        • Parekoy says:

          @Pacifico

          Binigyan mo pa ako ng trabaho, hirap naman yan, pero kung bibigyan mo ako ng tiket sa inaguaration, eh start na.

          Hwag kalimutan yung medication.

      • baycas says:

        This blog is his therapy…

        The psychotherapy I was referring in a previous thread.

    • macspeed says:

      MRP or RPM he he he i like RPM is is speed he he he anything related to speed is my liking he he he later i will tell everyone why he he he for now i dont want to miss a thing here….

      he he he he i can see, you dont like eating peanuts he he he that is not delicious he he he, but the fluid is fountain of youth….

      he he he CS again

    • clementejak says:

      True enough, as Bill Clinton has said, ” I did not have sex with that woman” and he was acquitted.

      That is the reason why oral sex is clearly defined.

    • Diwata says:

      bakla ka ba?

    • macspeed says:

      @baycas, this is it? he he he grabee na technology, dati napila pa ako 4am in the morning with a bag of 1 saudi riyal bago ko makausap kumander ko, ubos isang bag na 1 SR he he he, now is is so Cultural Shocking again he he he he what an invention….it was a modified vibrator adopting the control circuit of microprocessor and sensors he he he plus the sim card insertion to earn for provider or it maybe wi-fi without sim card he he he but one needs subscription, with these network, the sensors transmit the signals, the paired device abroad connected to the net as well wi-fi or what ever gets the partner reactions he he he

      lumawak na yun Newtons law naging cyber na, for every action, there is always an opposite equal reaction he he he via cyber space he he he

      • baycas says:

        As I have written, weak or bad signal will be a problem for remote cyber sex.

        Smart phones with multiple, simultaneously active SIM cards must be the platform for this Bluetooth device (sex toy).

        • Melinda says:

          aysus! the real one is still preferred. No thanks!

        • leona says:

          …since gratification is the only essential, buy 2: Zeus & Hera – if U are Zeus put Hera infront of you, or if U are Hera put Zeus infront of U; switch ON, internet is STRONG, no problema! Forget cyberspace! @Macspeed, you can bring this to the desert and enjoy without Internet! hehehe cultural shock ka na naman…

  73. Rax says:

    Here’s one from The Big Bang Theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ35e8VEwMk

    • Parekoy says:

      Like that show. Can appreciate more if one has Math and Science backgrounds.

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        You cannot have science without Math. Because math is the language of science.

        • moonie says:

          science as in medical science uses universal language, uniformly a dead language. often of greek or hebrew origin. medical terms are sometimes hard to understand for the uninitiated. I doubt if being doctor of medicine makes one a mathematician. at school, science and math are two different subjects.

  74. netty says:

    What can you say Rm { jk } Revibration Mode? I love love the exchange of repartee here for this penetrates my grey matter, you know, especially on the days when my senior moments are attacking me. Brilliant source of information this blog that I put it in the highest recommended reads of my day while drinking my Tassimo espresso. AHHH,deeper, deeper, more, more blogs please.Excuse my dust ;)

  75. X says:

    In the bible, just lusting for another is already having sex…

    • praetorius says:

      “mind sex”

    • Johnny Lin says:

      In the Bill version of the Bible, oral sex is not sex per se and everything depends on what the word “is” means

      The rest is american history!

      Another american historical fact:

      By the current definition of cyber adultery, (hand is a form of penetrating object) married american GIs have all committed adultery with the likes of Bardot, Raquel, Ursula, Sophia, Liz, Jane, Mae and Zsa zsa. Some new names are JLo, Coco, Jen, Kate, Christy and Heidi

      Joe Am, was your paramour in the list? Or Natalie was your type?
      He he he

      • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

        Amen to you @Johnny. Please take time to read my above lucid, logical sans graphic comment above.

        Let me tell you a story why we are here in this world.

        God created Adam and Eve. He told Adam and Eve to go out and multiply. Despite their being naked, virgin and Brad Pittish like, they did not multiply.

        God is frustrated. God is lonely. He asked Satan. Satan said there is mathematical solution to the problem so there will be exponentially many children romping around drive-by-shooting …

        Satan said to God, “we are in the garden of Eden represented by “E”. You want to to Multiply represented by “X”. What is missing is “S”. So to complete the equation S + E + X = Children ”

        God asked Satan how are they going to do that? What does it take?

        So, Satan called Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs planted Apple. The REST IS HIS STORY.

        Apple is now eaten all over the world. “An Apple a Day Keeps Doctors Away”.

        God asked why does Apple keeps the doctor away?

        Steve Jobs said, “Sex releases endorphin that makes people happy. Happy people are not prone to illness”

        THERE YOU ARE FOLKS !!!! My Story of SEX not HIS STORY.

        • macspeed says:

          he he he these waves delivers cultural shocked to CPM who cant handle these sort of words he he he dumadami na ang mga nalilito, ay ano ba yun? Ano ba ibig sabihin nun? he he he

          when one migrated, one becomes sick with Cultural shock from the inhabitants, the place, the technologies etc etc he he he

          twisting this thought, if one immigrant comes in, the inhabitants suffers the cultural shock instead, the place has become his place he he he and similarly everyone understand each other he he he

          • Mariano Renato Pacifico says:

            It is CULTURALLY SHOCKING !!!! Absolutely !!!!

            BASTA SEX ANG PINAG-USAPAN Magkaka-isa ang bayan !!!!

            • Alan says:

              You can’t seem to grasp or understand the power of sex.Just think of what you feel towards Ignacio

              • moonie says:

                I think he got mixed up with his landmarks. endorphins are chemicals found in the brain, not down below where sex organs are. sex releases sperms that make babies, accident or not. many things can be gotten from sex, eg, herpes, genital warts, AIDS too. not a happy occassion then.

  76. -->

Do share your thoughts:

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>